Bengaluru, Feb 19: Pointing out that there was a deliberate attempt to cover up police excesses by implicating innocent persons at whim, the Karnataka High Court on Tuesday granted conditional bail to 21 people who were accused by police of involving in violence during the protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) in Mangaluru.
Allowing the bail petitions of Ashik and 20 others from Udupi and Dakshina Kannada districts, Justice John Michael Cunha said the overzealousness of the police is also evident from the fact that FIRs were registered under Section 307 of IPC against the persons killed by the police themselves.
“In an offence involving a large number of people, the identity and participation of each accused must be fixed with reasonable certainty. In the present cases, the identity appears to have been fixed on the basis of their affiliation to PFI and they being members of the Muslim community. Though it is stated that the involvement of the petitioners is captured in CCTV footage and photographs, no such material is produced before the court showing the presence of any of the petitioners at the spot, armed with deadly weapons,” the judge noted.
In the statement of objections filed by the State Public Prosecutor-I, it was stated that there was a hint of Muslim youths holding protest on December 19, 2019, opposing the implementation of CAA. Prohibitory orders were clamped in that connection. This assertion indicated that the common object of the assembly was to oppose the implementation of CAA and National Register for Citizens (NRC) which, by itself, was not an “unlawful object”, the judge pointed out.
‘Pics show cops throwing stones at crowd’
Justice Cunha also said the material collected by the investigators did not contain any specific evidence regarding the presence of any of the petitioners at the spot. On the other hand, omnibus allegations were made against the Muslim crowd of 1,500-2,000, alleging that they were armed with weapons like stones, soda bottles and glass pieces. The photographs produced by the SPP depicted that hardly any member of the crowd were armed with weapons, except one of them holding a bottle. In none of these photographs, police station or policemen were seen in the vicinity, the judge noted.
“On the other hand, photographs produced by the petitioners show that the policemen themselves were pelting stones at the crowd. The petitioners have produced copies of the complaints lodged by the dependants of the deceased who died due to police firing and the endorsement made thereon reveals that even though the law required the police to register independent FIRs in view of the specific complaint made against the police officers making out cognizable offences, the police have failed to register FIRs. This goes to show that a deliberate attempt is underway to cover up police excesses by implicating innocent persons at the whims and caprice of the police,” the judge observed.
In the wake of counter-allegations against the police and in the backdrop of their failure to register FIRs based on complaints lodged by the families of victims, the possibility of false and mistaken implication could not be ruled out, the judge said. In these circumstances, it would be a travesty of justice to deny bail to the petitioners and sacrifice their liberties to the mercy of the district administration and police. The records indicate that a deliberate attempt has been made to trump up evidence and to deprive the liberties of the petitioners by fabricating evidence. None of the petitioners have any criminal antecedents, the court said.
“The allegations levelled against the petitioners are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. There is no direct evidence to connect them with the alleged offence. The investigation appears to be malafide and partisan. In the circumstances, in order to protect the rights and liberties of the petitioners, it is necessary to admit them to bail,” the judge said.
The petitioners were arrested and remanded in judicial custody after the anti-CAA protests on charges of being members of an unlawful assembly, armed with lethal weapons, attempting to set fire to the North Police Station in Mangaluru, obstructing the police from discharging their duties and causing damage to public property, etc., on December 19 in violation of the prohibitory orders. They moved the High Court as their bail pleas had been rejected by a sessions court in Dakshina Kannada.
Comments
He is a crazy without having any knowledge of islam. He only knows Talaq but does not know how to implement or follow it. such people are bringing shame to muslims and Islam. He should apologise for this great mistake and ask for pardon from Allah. May Allah give him right knowledge of Islam.
Rikacha ....idu democracy kanappa ....sumne avara paadige avaranna bidakke agalla ...crimes ge nimge non sharia beku ...kabbaddi adakke personal laws beku ...haha......hogappa ...eradu peg haaki ...bidko ...ohh ivattu yaava college hathra nu beat hogilla anths kanuthe raja Alva adikke....
I don't understand why non Muslims are more interested then Muslims to discuss about this subject. Mind your own business guys....don't disturb Muslims...they know what is good for them....
Very bad ...women are considered as property and I met one divorcee but well educated ..her husband left her just becoz she had baby girl ..he is roaming freely in India and she was in trauma ...later one good hearted married her ..of course he is a Hindu ...now they stay in Singapore only ...to send sexual abuse and polygamy ..govt must bring strong rules ....
Request everyone to watch video on triple talaq by Br.Imran. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MwNAgNNE-lI
This is an ignorant act to Claim a divorce, Divorce, in Islam is the most uncalled act for any man or women. The conditions and procedures are highly thoughtful & very clearly mentioned in Quran. A short example of one of the conditions: A triple Talaq doesnt mean reciting the word thrice & done, but, Giving a waiting period of 1 month to resolute and try to improve in between each claim of Talaq.
I would wish the commentators here just go through what the Quran says from the right source and understand the integrity of Justice given to both gender. This holds good for generations that's passed and for future to come.
When such incidents happens..
its a way Non Muslims & Some ignorant Muslims will know the reality of the divine law.
We Muslims know that Devils are most happy when couple part...
So a true Muslims will try to stay together as much as they can save their marriage form splitting each other.. and There is an option for the couple who could not go along with the partner.. (For eg : if the husband is dunkard and wife have a chance to give khula (talaq) or if the wife is dunkard and husband can have the option of giving talaq despite several warnings to quit the habit)
WE see compared to other religions, Muslim divorce rate is very less...
I would request the Non Muslims and the ignorant muslims who misuse this divine law to look the answers from the source or please check below video
\Br.imran Answering About Triple Talaq To a Non Muslim Sister\"
Well EXPLAINED .."
I don't know why the other part of women's right in Islam is not highlighted to public....they forgot how sita was left back in the jungle with luv and kush....can we know the reason please.......
If there is rift between couples, if every ways of compromise failed to unite them... is there any other solution other than divorce ? whether he proclaimed thru phone or writing letter or any other valid means , discussion on 'way of talaq' is second option.. discussion on 'condition of couple's relationship' should be first option for discussion...
Add new comment