Charges framed against 8 accused in delhi riots case!
Karkardooma court has framed charges against 8 people in the case related to the murder of an auto driver Babbu during the 2020 North east delhi riots. Karkardooma court acquitted 11 other accused in the case due to lack of evidence. Karkardooma court has framed charges against rahul alias Ajay, sandeep alias Sanjeev, Harjeet Singh alias Happy, Kuldeep, Bharat bhushan alias Lucky, dharmendra alias Dham, Sachin Gupta alias Moppy and Sachin Rastogi.
Karkardooma court framed charges under several sections
Karkardooma court has framed charges against eight accused in the case under sections 148, 153-A, 302 IPC along with 149 IPC and 188 IPC. The court found prima facie evidence against the eight accused under sections 148 (rioting with deadly weapon), 153-A (promoting enmity between groups), 302 IPC along with 149 (murder by unlawful assembly) and 188 (violation of prohibitory order under section 144 of the Code of criminal Procedure). The court dropped the charges of conspiracy under section 120-B of the IPC and making inflammatory statements under section 505 of the IPC in the case.
The Karkardooma court said in its order
The court said in its order that the common objective of the Hindu mob was to incite violence and the accused were actively involved in the murderous attack on Babbu. The court said that the statements of several witnesses, forensic reports and mobile phone data supported the claims of the delhi Police. The court said that the testimony of witnesses and video footage showed that Babbu was specifically targeted and beaten by members of the Hindu mob.
The court said that several public witnesses and police officers have identified the accused in the photographs and video clips of the dossier. The court remarked that it is not the case that any of these accused have been charged on the basis of the disclosure of the co-accused. The court said that if the investigating officer has not got all those identified in the video by the witnesses, then it can be considered a lapse on the part of the investigating officer, but such a lapse of the investigating officer does not eliminate the evidence of the witnesses.
click and follow Indiaherald WhatsApp channel