NEW DELHI: After passing a series of orders on glaring lapses in investigation in several northeast Delhi riots cases, a city court has now pointed out discrepancies in the testimony of police witnesses during trial. It said prima facie one of the witnesses was lying on oath during recording of evidence.
Subsequent to recording of the prosecution evidence being complete, the court noted that head constable Sanoj had categorically stated on oath that he had identified three more rioters by their names as well as professions. On the contrary, ASI Ram Dass stated that the three accused could not be identified during investigation.
Additional Sessions Judge Vinod Yadav said, “Prima facie, one of the police witnesses is lying on oath punishable under IPC Section 193 (punishment for false evidence).”
“Sanoj categorically asserted their presence at the spot at the time of riots. However, the investigating officer (IO) has admitted that there is nothing on record to substantiate that the matter qua aforesaid three accused persons was ever investigated despite their names being there on record,” said the court.
The order added, “On the contrary, it is stated that the identity of these accused could not be established during investigation. There is no material on record that efforts were ever made by the IO to apprehend the said accused persons.”
The court was also informed that the three people had been specifically named as accused by one Nisar Ahmed in another case, but even in that matter they had not been interrogated. “This is a very sorry state of affairs,” the judge observed.
The judge directed the DCP concerned to file a report in the matter related to vandalism of properties on February 26, 2020 at Bhagirathi Vihar. Four people were booked in the case.
