Anti-CAA Protests: Tis Hazari Court Grants Bail to All 15 Arrested in Daryaganj Violence Case

New Delhi: Following heated arguments, all 15 persons arrested in connection with violence at Daryaganj during a protest against the controversial Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) were granted bail on January 9 by Tis Hazari Court.

Additional Sessions Judge Dr Kamini Lau ordered that the accused be released on bail by furnishing a bond of Rs 25,000 each. All of them have been asked to appear before the Station House Officer (SHO) concerned on last Saturday of every month and to surrender their passports, if any. They have also been ordered not to influence any witness in the case.

Their bail application was earlier rejected by a metropolitan magistrate on December 23. All the 15 accused have been booked under sections 147, 148, 149 186, 353, 332, 323 and 436 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and sections 3 and 4 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act.

On January 8, the court had asked the prosecution — which was opposing the bail plea arguing that five policemen and a reporter suffered injuries in the violent protest — to file medico legal certificates (MLC) of all those were injured in the incident and CCTV footage till 3 pm yesterday.

After the prosecution failed to do so, the court had adjourned the matter for 2 pm today. The investigating officers once again failed to comply with the court’s order today as well.

The enraged court issued a bailable warrant against Chief Medical Officer (CMO) or the officer concerned at the Lok Nayak Jai Prakash Narayan (LNJP) Hospital and ordered the investigating officers to produce the CMO or the concerned officer before it.

The police did not do so as the CMO refused to appear before the court, saying he is on duty. The police also failed to produce the records sought. It prompted the judge to grant bail to the all accused.

The defence had submitted that all the 15 accused had been in judicial custody since December 21. A total of 50 people were detained after the occurrence of the incident on December 21 evening at 6 pm. Thirty-five of them were later released.

The accused who were remanded to judicial custody were not even named in the first information report (FIR), which was filed seven hours after their detention. The defence also raised that no police custody was sought when the accused were presented before a magistrate and no recovery of any dangerous weapon was made from their custody.

“The FIR does not indicate individual role of the applicants in the incident. Mere presence in the area where the incident happened does not imply their involvement,” said Senior Advocate Rebecca Mamen John, further submitting that the applicants are from lower strata of society.

She also submitted that there is no ground to invoke Section 436 of the IPC as no dwelling house or place of worship had been attacked by fire, even as per the allegation made in the FIR.

She further said no public property was destroyed either. The FIR is based on the allegation of setting ablaze a car.

She submitted that the two non bailable offences – Sections 353 and 332 of the IPC – prescribe a jail term of two and three years respectively. Citing a Supreme Court dictum in Arnesh Kumar case, she stated that there was no requirement of mandatory arrest for offences with a punishment of less than seven years.

Public Prosecutor Pankaj Bhatia vehemently opposed the 15 bail applications submitting that 17 policemen, including two inspectors, SHO of the area and the joint commissioner of police concerned, have sustained injuries in the incident.

The prosecution said the objective of the “unlawful assembly was to cause damage/burn the office of the deputy commissioner of police (Central) by burning the car parked opposed to it”. It submitted that government/public property (pillars) were uprooted and thrown on the car that was burnt.

The prosecution further said public witnesses have deposed under section 161 Cr.PC about the incident and that the injured policemen have identified the applicants.

The alleged incident of rioting took place on the fateful evening of December 19 after thousands of people had congregated at Jama Masjid with an objective to register their protest against the controversial citizenship law and the proposed National Register of Indian Citizens (NRIC).

The protestors split over the area of Daryagang but they were stopped near Delhi Gate, which had triggered the violence.

Also read: Yashwant Sinha Launches Gandhi Shanti Yatra to Oppose CAA and NRC