2020 Delhi Riots: HC Upholds Conviction of Five Men in Monish Killing Case
The Delhi High Court has dismissed appeals from five men convicted of culpable homicide in the killing of 22-year-old Monish during the 2020 riots.
The Delhi High Court has delivered a significant blow to five men convicted in a killing case stemming from the 2020 North-East Delhi riots. Justice Madhu Jain dismissed the appeals filed by the convicts, upholding their conviction for rioting and culpable homicide not amounting to murder in the death of 22-year-old Monish.
The Verdict and Sentencing
In a judgment pronounced on October 27, the court upheld the convictions of Aman Kashyap, Devinder Kumar, Pradeep Rai, Ashish (alias Goli), and Arun Kumar. The men were found guilty under Sections 148 and 304 Part I, read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
The High Court's decision affirms the previous rulings of the Additional Sessions Judge-03, North-East District, Karkardooma Courts. The trial court had originally sentenced the five individuals to:
- Seven years of rigorous imprisonment and a fine of ₹30,000 under Section 304 Part I IPC.
- One year of simple imprisonment under Section 148 IPC.
The court ordered that these substantive sentences run concurrently.
The Gruesome Events of February 2020
The case dates back to February 25, 2020, during the wave of communal violence that gripped North-East Delhi. According to the prosecution, Monish was targeted by a mob near Brijpuri, in the area surrounding Peer Baba Mazar in Chand Bagh.
The victim was chased and brutally assaulted by the mob. Although he was rushed to Guru Teg Bahadur Hospital, he succumbed to his injuries. A post-mortem report later revealed that the cause of death was shock resulting from severe brain injuries caused by blunt-force impact.
Evidence and Eyewitness Accounts
The prosecution's case relied heavily on the testimonies of eyewitnesses, which included members of the police force. One key witness, Constable Piyush, testified that he saw the five appellants at the forefront of the mob, actively encouraging others to assault Monish.
The Defence's Arguments
The five men challenged their conviction on several grounds, attempting to cast doubt on the prosecution's evidence. Their legal team argued that:
- There were inconsistencies in witness accounts.
- No test identification parade was conducted.
- There was a significant delay in recording the statements of police witnesses.
- There were discrepancies regarding the exact location of the incident.
- The prosecution failed to prove the specific individual role each man played in inflicting the fatal injuries.
Court's Reasoning on Investigative Lapses
Justice Madhu Jain addressed the defence's concerns, particularly regarding the delay in recording statements. The court noted that this delay must be viewed in the context of the 2020 riots, where police were investigating numerous cases simultaneously. The judge ruled that this delay alone did not discredit the witnesses or prove that the men were falsely implicated.
Regarding the technical evidence, the court clarified that hospital CCTV footage was used to identify the victim, not to prove the presence of the accused. Furthermore, the court observed that while call-detail records (CDR) provide an approximate location of a mobile device, they do not establish the precise physical location of the user. Therefore, the lack of electronic evidence placing the men at the exact spot did not override the reliable eyewitness testimony.
While the High Court acknowledged that there were certain deficiencies in the investigation, it held that such lapses do not automatically justify rejecting a prosecution case when the available evidence sufficiently establishes the offence.