New Delhi, March 18 A court here has acquitted two men in a case related to the 2020 Delhi riots, stating that it would be unsafe to rely on the testimonies of the two police witnesses as there is serious doubt about the claim that they were present together at the incident site.
Furthermore, the prosecution failed to examine the available public witness during the trial, depriving the case of crucial corroboration, Additional Sessions Judge Parveen Singh said in his order absolving Prem Prakash and Manish, who were accused of vandalism, arson, and looting of shops in northeast Delhi during the February 2020 riots.
In the order dated March 14, the court said, "I am of the opinion that it would be highly unsafe to rely upon the testimonies of these witnesses to hand down a finding of guilt against the accused. Both the accused are found entitled to a benefit of doubt".
Both were arrested in the case registered at the New Usmanpur police station based on complaints that several shops, including salons, a bakery, a meat shop and a bike repair shop, were vandalised by a mob on February 25, 2020.
The prosecution relied primarily on the testimonies of two police witnesses who claimed to have identified the accused as part of the mob involved in the violence.
However, the court found discrepancies in their statements and observed that official records contradicted their presence together at the scene of the crime.
"According to official entries, both witnesses had left the police station with different teams for different duties, and there is no explanation as to how they came together at the spot," the court noted.
The judge further observed that one of the key witnesses appeared to have been present at another location around the same time, raising doubts about his testimony.
"This creates a serious doubt about the presence of the witness at the scene of the crime and consequently about his claim of having identified the accused," the court said.
The court also noted that despite the availability of a public witness during the investigation, the prosecution failed to examine him during the trial, depriving the case of crucial corroboration.
Holding that it would be "highly unsafe" to rely solely on the testimonies of the police witnesses, the court said the prosecution had failed to establish the guilt of the accused beyond a reasonable doubt.
"Both the accused are accordingly acquitted of the charges framed against them. Their bail bonds stand cancelled. Sureties stand discharged," the court said.