Delhi court books Rohini SHO, police personnel for 'brutal assault' on suspect

The Court has declared the allegations against the accused were false and that it was a result of a 'calculated assault'. The court demanded an investigation team be set up on this case and to ensure fairness in the process.

New Delhi: A team of Delhi Police, who had allegedly barged into a house and staged a dog fight, was pulled by a city court on Tuesday which noted that the accused arrested in that raid was subjected to brutal assault and atrocities during his detention in the police custody.

Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Babru Bhan observed that the injuries on the accused were apparently a result of a 'calculated assault' after overpowering him.

The Court has directed the Deputy Commissioner of Police (DCP) of Rohini district to lodge a First Information Report (FIR) against the concerned Station House Officer (SHO) and erring police personnel for offences under sections 323 (voluntarily causing hurt), 342(Wrongful confinement),506 (criminal intimidation), 509 (intending to insult the modesty of any woman), 354 (Assault or criminal force to woman with intent to outrage her modesty), 429 (Mischief by killing or maiming cattle), 166A (Public servant disobeying law) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and other relevant provisions.

The court said that it has found truth in allegations of the complainant against the accused.

"Since the FIR is directed to be registered against the concerned SHO, therefore, the concerned Joint Commissioner of Police (CP) shall ensure that investigation is conducted by such an agency and officer that fairness in the process of investigation can be ensured," the court said and listed the matter for filing compliance report on January 3, 2022.

The court also said that it is apparent that neither the accused was arrested at the time nor in the manner alleged by the police. "Further, the injuries are apparently a result of calculated assault after overpowering the accused," the court said.

The court noted that the bruises on parts of the accused were so serious that the same were present even on December 16. It said that such injuries cannot be caused in a free fight, as alleged by the police.

"Such injuries are possible only when someone is completely overpowered and blows with a blunt object are repeatedly given at the same spot, which is not possible in one-to-one fight, " the court said.

Furthermore, the audio-video clip shared by the wife of the accused clearly belies the theory of a stray dog entering the house of the accused and fighting their dog, the court noted and pointed out that the video shows a furious dog being incited by some persons in police uniform.

"Some females of the house can be heard begging for mercy. So, the explanation put forth by the police is not in consonance with the material produced by the complainant i.e the wife of the accused and the visuals in the video and medical records," the order copyread.

"Whatever may be the argument, if police resorts to violence to apprehend the accused and adopts custodial atrocities to gather evidence, it is accountable for the violation of fundamental rights as law nowhere permits custodial atrocities for the purpose of collection of evidence during the investigation," it remarked.

Delhi Police claimed that during the arrest of the accused, a team reached his house at about 10:11 pm on December 8 and when they knocked at the door, it was not opened by the woman present in the house.

The police further claimed that they used 'reasonable force' to break open the door of the house but family members of the accused put forth some resistance in the apprehension of the accused and their pet dog started barking.

"In the meanwhile, one stray dog also entered the house and the dogs started fighting and thereafter, the dogs ran away. After all the efforts, the accused was apprehended at 03.00 am. He was brought to Police Station and arrested at 06.30 am," the police stated.

But the court noted that the concerned SHO had admitted the fact before the Duty MM during judicial proceedings that the accused was apprehended at 11.00 pm on December 8, 2021. At this juncture, this court has no reason to ignore the said judicial record, the court said.

ANI