Navya writes and speaks about matters that often do not come out or doesn’t see daylight. Defense and economy of the country is of special interest to her and a lot of her content revolves around that.
A Delhi court said on July 13, while dismissing murder accused AAP Councillor Tahir Hussain's bail plea said that Hussain allegedly used rioters as "human weapons" who could have killed anybody.
Hussain is an accused in the murder case of IB staffer Ankit Sharma during the communal riots in northeast Delhi. Additional Sessions Judge Vinod Yadav said that a "powerful person" like Hussain can threaten witnesses in the case if left on bail.
"At this stage, I find that there is enough material on record to presume that the applicant was very well present at the spot of crime and was exhorting the rioters of a particular community and as such, he did not use his hands and fists, but rioters as ''human weapons'', who on his instigation could have killed anybody," the judge said in the order.
"In this case, it is apparent that witnesses, whose statements have been recorded are residents of the same locality and they can easily be threatened by a powerful person like the applicant (Hussain)," the order read.
The judge later clarified that anything mentioned in the order was based upon "prima analysis of material available on record at this stage which is yet to be tested on the touchstone of trial".
The Delhi Police, in its charge sheet filed in the case, had alleged there was a deep-rooted conspiracy behind Sharma's murder as he was specifically targeted by a mob led by rebel AAP leader Hussain.
"51 sharp injuries on his body and the way Sharma was killed by the cold-blooded rioters has shaken the social fabric of the society and instilled fear in the minds of the residents of the area," the charge sheet mentioned, referring to the autopsy report of the IB Officer.
The court also said that even if there is no video footage showing Hussain's presence at the spot, there was enough proof to establish that he was present at the site of the incident.
During the hearing, senior advocate KK Manan and advocate Uditi Bali, representing Hussain, claimed there was no proof which can connect Hussain in the murder of Sharma. They also alleged that he was not present at the site of crime on February 25 and his alleged presence stated by the witnesses was false.
Hussain had allegedly provided logistic support to the rioters at the roof of his house, the public prosecutor claimed.
Thank you for subscribing.
We have sent you a confirmation email.