New Delhi: The Delhi high court on Tuesday asked the Delhi police why it has not filed a chargesheet in the case concerning the death of a 23-year-old man who was forced to sing the national anthem during the 2020 northeast Delhi riots and asked it to conduct its investigation without influence or fear.
Justice Chandra Dhari Singh, who was hearing a petition filed by Kismatun, the mother of Faizan, seeking a speedy and proper investigation, said that the case was to be taken seriously and asked the investigating agency to take into account the suggestions by the petitioner in her plea.
The incident relates to a video that had gone viral during the February 2020 riots in which Faizan and others, apparently injured, were beaten by policemen and forced to sing the national anthem and ‘Vande Mataram’.
Kismatun has sought an SIT probe into the death of her son. She has claimed that the police illegally detained her son and denied him critical health care due to which he succumbed to the injuries on February 26, 2020.
The deputy commissioner of police (DCP) concerned told the court that the case involves technical evidence and that the investigation has zeroed down a head constable making the video but not those assaulting the victim and that “no stone was being left unturned in the probe”.
The judge, who remarked that there was no ground to disbelieve one of the highest officers in the police machinery, was further informed by Delhi police lawyer Amit Prasad that while they have identified some people, confirmation was needed from all angles.
The court was informed that the agency will take eight more weeks to complete the probe. Accordingly, the matter was posted for further hearing on May 11.
The court clarified that it was not interfering with the manner of investigation and added, “The son of a mother has died. I’m not commenting on how and when (but) it has to be taken very seriously and dealt with as per the criminal law.”
“This court has no ground to disbelieve one of the highest-ranking officers..(I’m asking you to) without influence investigate the matter as per the mandate of the CrPC (Criminal Procedure Code) and Delhi Police manual,” the judge said.
“The petition has been filed for proper investigation, without influence from anything. Whatever important person is involved, you have to complete the investigation without any influence. This is the purpose of keeping the petition pending. I am not here to interfere in any manner to the investigation investigated by the investigating agency. If I saw anything hanky panky in the status report, then I can interfere,” the court observed, according to LiveLaw.
Delhi police said that the statements of the witnesses have been recorded and one of the surviving persons, who was with the deceased, has not alleged any violence and that the investigating agency was awaiting the outcome of certain other technical tests.
Lawyer Vrinda Grover, appearing for the petitioner, stated that no arrest was made in the case and the police earlier made a false statement concerning the status of CCTVs in the concerned police station and that the investigating agency was not probing the second scene of the crime i.e the police station and sought permission to file a response to the police status report.
“Why would a police station be misleading [the] investigation is what they are looking at now,” she argued, according to LiveLaw.
To this, the Delhi police’s lawyer said, “We have identified some people. That confirmation has to happen. The reason we are not going with arrest is that once the confirmation from all angles happens.”
The court asked the petitioner to raise objections after the chargesheet is filed and asked her to have some faith in the investigating agency and observed that there was no reason to disbelieve their stand by invoking the writ jurisdiction.
“Suggestions in the writ petition can be taken into account for the investigation,” said the court as it asked the Delhi police to carry out the investigation without any fear or influence for the purpose of justice to the victim.
The court added, “Please do (investigation) without any fear or influence and for purpose of justice of victim, whatever suggestion she has given in the writ petition or status report, you can take it for purpose of Investigation.”
Last month, the HC had pulled up the police for its investigation and said that its status report, which was filed in a sealed cover, was neither here nor there .
Justice Mukta Gupta had questioned the police over the increased number of injuries (20) recorded in the post mortem report of deceased Faizan as compared to the medical report prepared prior to his detention in police custody where only three injuries were recorded.
This article first appeared on thewire.in