Hearing a case related to the anti-Hindu riots that shook Delhi in the year 2020, a Delhi court has sentenced a convict to seven years of rigorous imprisonment. While giving the verdict, the court said that this was not a minor crime and some important facts could not be ignored. The court has also sentenced another person who was an accomplice of the accused to five years imprisonment.
While pronouncing the verdict, the court said that firing on the police shows the readiness of these two to challenge the state, and this attitude is dangerous for society. Additional Sessions Judge Pulastya Pramachala was hearing a case against Imran alias Model and Imran related to the riots. Both of them were convicted on charges of being part of an unlawful crowd who rioted in Delhi’s Brijpuri area on 25 February 2020 and had used criminal force against police officers by firing bullets. A Delhi police constable was injured in this attack.
According to the prosecution, convict Imran alias Model had a pistol, and he opened fire on Delhi police officials, while his partner Imran supported him in the crime and instigated him. The judge said, “I think that the crime committed in this case is not a small crime, but the lack of education, the influence of mob sentiments, and the young age of both the culprits cannot be ignored”. He added, “Therefore, the punishment against the culprits will have to be decided by adopting a middle path. The specific role of each accused will also have to be kept in mind”.
The court sentenced Model and Imran to seven years and five years of rigorous imprisonment, respectively, under section 307 (attempt to murder) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The court sentenced the duo to three years of rigorous imprisonment for intentionally causing hurt to prevent a public servant from performing his duty and sentenced him to simple imprisonment of one year and six months for the offenses of rioting, being armed with a deadly weapon, and disobedience, respectively. The court made it clear that the sentences would run concurrently.
The court, considering the evidence presented before it, said that the culprits had willingly participated in the riots, and it cannot be said that they were under any pressure or compulsion. Both of them damaged the properties of innocent people without any hesitation, and keeping a pistol was also not a big deal for him. The court said that apart from this, shooting at someone without any personal enmity and provocation shows a criminal mentality.
The court said, “This was a crime committed without any personal reason. Firing on the police force cannot be taken as a normal crime, and damaging other people’s properties without any reason is a big danger these days”.
