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
If Constitution agrees then why these anti national chaddeez are against it. Going against our constitutional laws ..chaddeezz are anti nationals...find an island and throw these chaddeezz there and call it bajrangistan....and let them die saying bharath Mata ki jai...
people from all part of world, COMMUNITY & CAST are keen to know about Muslims lifestyle, our culture & our marriages because we are the center of attraction.
There is no compulsion in religion - Nobody is FORCING HER. That is the TRUTH our ISLAM teaches.
Come on Cheddis : Before U protest without knowledge. U too try to read QURAN. there is a special message to YOU guys, who R trying to make troubles in the society. But there is also forgiveness too for those who repent.
Y dont U read QURAN? When U read, U will come to know Y U guys are there in aggression... and anger without TRUE knowledge of any incident...
Y are U acting like DONKEYs as per YOUR cheddi leaders instructions.
Dont U use YOUR God given intellectual. Please come on guys . Use YOur intellect and read QURAN to understand better, who is behind such HATE that U guys are spreading.
CHADDI GALIGE BURNOL BHAGYA ....HEHEHEHE
Ma Sha Allah.. May Allah bless you both and we wish you a happy married life.. stay blessed and be happy always.. Prove the chaddis that they are wrong!
Maaasha'Allah... may Allah bless the couple with lots n lots of happiness....baarakallahu lakum wa baaraka alaika wa jama'ah bainakuma fee khairin aafiya'h
Parents of both families agreed, Constitution agrees, but Sanghi goons who are anti-constitution have problems. We Muslims know that there is no such thing as love-jihad in Islam and none of the Muslims ever practice such an immorality in the name of Islam to cause trouble. Neither do sensible Hindus.
May Allah Safeguard the couple and guide them.
BTW, It is Haram for Muslim Man to marry a Polytheist. Hope the boy and his family knows this too.
\ There is no compulsion in religion \" : said the liar"
There is no such a thing like love jihad....its a kind of lies filling in the minds good majority hindus by those protector of hindusm...in reality these so called protectors are the big drunkards....criminals....
Add new comment