On Tuesday, the Delhi Police conveyed to the Karkardooma court that the individuals accused in the February 2020 riots in northeast Delhi have filed applications inquiring about the status of the investigation with the sole intention of disrupting the trial proceedings.
In emphasizing the Delhi Police's unassailable right to conduct an investigation, Senior Public Prosecutor (SPP) Amit Prasad argued that the accused cannot employ such tactics to demand information from the prosecution regarding the ongoing investigation.
This matter came to the forefront when the Delhi Police was slated to commence its arguments on charges last week. Some of the accused raised objections, contending that this could only occur after the prosecution officially declared the investigation as concluded.
In response to this, the court suggested that the lawyers representing the accused should submit applications if they wished to seek clarification from the police concerning the progression of the investigation. Subsequently, a number of the accused filed such applications, sparking debates concerning their legality and admissibility, as raised by the Delhi Police.
Prasad further informed the court that these accused individuals do not possess any legal entitlement to request information regarding the investigation's status before the arguments on charges begin. According to him, there is no provision in the law that affords them the right to request such a disclosure. He also questioned the legal basis under which the accused can inquire about the overall progress of the investigation.
Prasad contended that the accused are attempting to circumvent the established legal processes to obtain relief that is neither available to them nor permissible under the law.
Additionally, Prasad underscored that the Delhi Police had already submitted chargesheets in the case. If the accused had any objections to the supplementary chargesheets, they had the opportunity to seek their dismissal.
Reiterating his previous argument that the accused are attempting to prolong the trial, SPP Prasad pointed out that they waited for a substantial 40-day period after the court had set a date for the commencement of daily charge arguments.
By emphasizing the accused individuals' endeavours to postpone the trial, Prasad also noted that they had waited for an extended duration after the court established a date for the charge arguments to proceed on a daily basis. He further highlighted that if the accused had legitimate grievances, they could have contested the order before the High Court, which they neglected to do.
In summary, he stated, "The applications presently filed are simply intended to disrupt the trial."
Earlier this month, the Delhi Police informed the Karkardooma court that the accused individuals in the February 2020 northeast Delhi riots who were granted bail were employing "strategies" to delay the case's trial.
Delhi Police counsel SPP Amit Prasad contended, "The date for charge arguments was set one month ago, and the accused's legal representatives had ample time to voice any concerns."
Prasad asserted that these actions were merely "strategies" employed by those out on bail to ensure that other accused parties would also benefit. He described it as a "larger conspiracy" by those charged under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act.
Â
