Delhi court acquits AAP MLA, others in 2016 case

A Delhi court has acquitted AAP MLA Anil Jha and others booked for committing offences under the SC/ST Act, among others.

Special Judge Jitendra Singh advised the investigating officers to ''keep in mind that false accusations could result in the prosecution and conviction of innocent persons'' and the ''falsely accused person may suffer considerable societal stigma, damage to reputation and psychological harm''.

The court was hearing a case against Jha and four others booked under Sections 323 (voluntarily causing hurt) and 34 (common intention) on the complaint of one Sanjay Kumar.

They were also booked under Section 3 (1) (r) and (s) of SC/ST Act (intentional insults, intimidation with intent to humiliate a SC or ST in any place within public view and abuse of any SC/ST member by caste name in any place within public view).

In an order on May 31, the court outlined the inconsistencies in the testimonies of the witnesses which it said ''dented the prosecution's case''.

''Though use of caste based remarks by the accused person against the complainant has not been positively proved by the prosecution, even for the sake of argument, the use of caste-based remarks by an individual who is not a member of SC, directed at a colleague who is a SC member, during a heated exchange at public event cannot be construed as intentional humiliation, particularly when both individuals have known each other for a considerable period through their association with the same political party,'' the court held.

Kumar, it appeared, attempted to attribute a ''criminal colour'' to a verbal altercation with Jha, which stemmed from their respective political affiliations and activities, the order added.

''It is not unusual in such circumstances for the incident to be exaggerated, with the apparent intention of falsely implicating the accused in more serious offences, thereby attempting to invoke stringent provisions such as the SC/ST Act,'' the verdict said.

The court observed that the police did not place on record a ''crucial'' video clip of the alleged incident.

Expressing ''astonishment'', the court said the investigating officer who was of the rank of an assistant commissioner of police, did not bother to secure the electronic device (cell phone) of the complainant or that of a journalist who recorded a video of the alleged incident.

''Apparently, IO has shown utter negligence in the collection of the electronic evidence. It is further pertinent to mention herein that the IO in his cross-examination has categorically deposed that accused 1 (Jha) was nowhere to be seen in the alleged video clip,'' the court said.

The court highlighted the prosecution's failure in proving the charges beyond a reasonable doubt owing to the ''contradictions, omissions and lacunas''.

''The IO is expected to keep in mind that false accusations have far-reaching consequences as they may result in the prosecution and conviction of innocent persons. The falsely accused person may suffer considerable societal stigma, damage to reputation and psychological harm.'' Kumar alleged Jha and others thrashed him and humiliated him with casteist slurs during a public event on February 2, 2016.

(This story has not been edited by Devdiscourse staff and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)