The Delhi High Court upheld trial court’s decision, refusing Delhi Police’s plea to recall a prosecution witness in the arson case linked to the 2020 North-East Delhi riots, involving former AAP leader Tahir Hussain. The Court noted that the police’s request lacked merit and saw no justification to interfere with the reasoned order of the trial court.
The case arises from incidents during the 2020 North-East Delhi riots, where a shop in Karawal Nagar, Chand Bagh was allegedly looted, vandalized, and set on fire. Charges were framed against six accused on February 7, 2023, and the matter proceeded to examination of prosecution witnesses. On January 28, 2025, PW-23 (Sub-Inspector) deposed that on February 24, 2020, around 11:30 pm to midnight, he had visited the scene in response to a call and observed the shop burnt with the shutter broken. Subsequently, on February 4, 2025, PW-26 (Head Constable) testified that he accompanied Sub-Inspector to the site on the same date and found the shop in normal condition, leading the prosecution to seek recall of PW-23 for clarification.
Delhi Police argued that recalling Sub-Inspector was necessary to resolve the discrepancy between the testimonies of Sub-Inspector and Head Constable regarding the shop’s condition on February 24, 2020. The prosecution maintained that this clarification was essential to ensure accuracy of evidence.
The defence counsel opposed the recall, submitting that the trial court’s order was reasoned and required no interference. They highlighted that Sub-Inspector’s statement had already been recorded, and any discrepancy regarding the date could have been addressed during cross-examination. The defence also noted that multiple witnesses had cited February 25, 2020, as the date of the incident, negating any claim of new discovery or prejudice.
The state contended that the recall involved only a minor clarification on the date, which would not prejudice the accused, and sought the opportunity to examine Sub-Inspector for that limited purpose.
After reviewing the submissions and records, Justice Neena Bansal Krishna observed, “Submissions heard, record perused. Dismissed. No merit.” The Court underscored that the trial court had already rendered a reasoned decision, and there was no substantive ground to recall Sub-Inspector solely for minor discrepancies in date.
The Court dismissed the plea filed by Delhi Police seeking recall of Sub-Inspector. The trial court’s order rejecting the request was affirmed, thereby allowing the matter to proceed without reopening examination of the witness. A detailed copy of the order is awaited.
Disclaimer: This news/ article includes information received via a syndicated news feed. The original rights remain with the respective publisher.
Picture Source :
