Aishwarya Rathore –
Published On: September 17, 2021, at 11:35 IST
A Delhi Court ruled that a National Investigative Agency cannot initiate a fresh case by recording a Supplementary Statement of one of the complainants, if the components of Section 436 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) were not present in the first two written complaints made to the Police.
The Court made the remark while acquitting Sandeep Kumar of an offence under Section 436 of the IPC.
Additional Sessions Judge Vinod Yadav stated, “This Court is conscious of the fact that cases of Communal Riots have to be considered with utmost sensitivity, but that does not mean that common sense should be given goby; mind has to be applied even at this stage with regard to the material available on record.”
However, the Court noted that one Mohd. Zakir had not said a single word about the Riotous Mob setting fire to his house on February 25, 2020, and that all of a sudden, during the recording of his statement under Section 161 of the Criminal Procedure Code by the Investigation Officer in May, 2020, Zakir mentioned “Traces of smoke” being found inside his house.
Accordingly, the Court ordered the accused to appear before the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Court on September 28.
Click here to read/download the Order
Also Read: Directions of E-filing in Delhi High Court