Uttam Nagar Holi clash: Delhi Court orders release of accused 'mistakenly arrested'

A Delhi court on Friday ordered the immediate release of a man who was ''mistakenly arrested'' in connection with the killing of a youth during a clash between two families on Holi in southwest Delhi's Uttam Nagar.

On March 4, 26-year-old Tarun died after being injured in a clash between two neighbouring families of different communities. The altercation was triggered after a water balloon thrown by a girl from one community accidentally hit a woman from the other.

Additional Sessions Judge Shivali Bansal was hearing the case against Imran alias Bunty, accused in the case, and refused to take cognisance of the charge sheet filed against him, noting that the charge sheet itself stated that he was not involved in the crime and had been arrested due to mistaken identity.

In an order, the court said, ''Upon perusal of the charge sheet, it is found that accused Imran was arrested on the basis of a statement of witnesses; however, upon investigation, it was found by the police that accused Imran alias Bunty, son of Safi Mohd, was not the same Imran who was involved in the commission of the crime.''.

The court observed that the actual accused was another person named Imran, son of Umardeen, and that no incriminating material had been found against Imran alias Bunty during the investigation, including analysis of CCTV footage.

''To the utter dismay of this court, the IO (investigating officer) had not taken steps for the release of accused Imran alias Bunty until filing of the charge sheet despite knowing about the illegal custody of the accused,'' the judge said.

The judge also directed that a copy of the order be sent to the joint commissioner of police for ''necessary information and action''.

According to the order, the victim's mother had named several persons, including an ''Imran'', in complaints submitted on March 7 and 8. Based on the statements, the accused was arrested on March 8 from Uttam Nagar police station.

However, the court noted that subsequent investigation and witness statements prima facie established that the arrested man was not involved in the offence.

The judge further remarked that the investigating officer had informed the court that he became aware on May 3 that the accused had been wrongly arrested, but no steps were taken for his release until the filing of the charge sheet.

The court also took cognisance against 17 other accused persons under various provisions of the BNS and the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

Separately, the court directed jail authorities to produce all accused through video conferencing during future hearings after an application cited security concerns and the possibility of attacks during physical production in court.

The court listed the matter on June 6 for further proceedings.

Earlier, the incident triggered protests by some groups, during which two vehicles linked to some of the accused were set on fire. Police have since arrested multiple accused in connection with the case.

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