Why Does The Law Varies For Shahrukh Pathan?

The Delhi High Court has granted bail to two men Shiva and Nitin accused of firing bullets during the North East Delhi riots last year, saying the injury received to the victim was not a gunshot but by a stone.

The High Court said it deems it fit to grant regular bail to the two accused on furnishing a personal bond of Rs 50,000 each with two surety bonds of the like amount.

“Considering the material placed on record and the fact that the injury received to Azim was not by a gunshot but by a stone, this court deems it fit to grant regular bail to the petitioners,” Justice Mukta Gupta said.

The Court directed the two accused not to leave the country without prior permission of the court concerned and intimate the court in case of a change of their residential address or mobile number or sureties.

It said, “needless to note that any observation made herein above is only for the purpose of coming to a prima facie conclusion in relation to the grant of bail and the same will have no bearing on merits during the course of the trial”. According to the prosecution, the two men — Shiva and Nitin — who are accused of rioting were armed with a deadly weapon and attempted to commit culpable homicide under the IPC and under the Arms Act.

Kapil Gujjar, the person who brought a gun to the protest site at Shaheen Bagh and opened fire amidst police personnel was also granted bail by the court within days for his open and unprovoked aggression. Whereas Shahrukh Pathan, who pulled a pistol from violent goons and fired in the air to disperse the violent mob and saved women protesters at Jafrabad has been incarcerated for the alleged offence for the past 550 days.

In the case of Shahrukh Pathan, the High Court denied bail citing that ‘the pictures displayed before the Court (Shahrukh brandishing a pistol) have shaken the conscience of the Court how petitioner could take law and order in his hands’.

The Court further said that “Whether or not the accused had intention to kill the complainant or any person present in the public with his open air pistol shots, but it is hard to believe that Shahrukh had no knowledge that his act may harm anyone present at the spot”.

Shahrukh Pathan, a regular guy became infamous for his act of pointing a pistol at a policeman during North East Delhi violence. He almost came to be the negative face of the Delhi pogrom which was sponsored to target Muslims.

A college dropout Shahrukh was interested in bodybuilding and modelling, he used to make TikTok videos and run a sock manufacturing unit. In order to dwarf the real perpetrators of the violence, the media was made to run stories on Shahrukh Pathan to project him as the poster boy of the pogrom. When he was in the crowd, Shahrukh spotted a man in front of him with a pistol. With the intention of saving himself, he used his presence of mind and kicked the man above his ankles. He slipped and the pistol fell from his hands. Shahrukh got hold of it and then shot in the air, dispersing the entire crowd.

However, no death or injury was reported neither by the bullet nor by stone since Shahrukh fired in the air to disperse the violent goons.

Nevertheless, since Pathan was captured on camera pointing a gun at a police constable during the Delhi riots on February 24, 2020, he was apprehended on 03.03.2020. A case was registered against him under various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for rioting, being a member of unlawful assembly, attempt to murder, and sections of the Arms Act.

Denying his bail petition, the court observed “the accused is alleged to have participated in the riots and has been duly identified. His picture speaks volumes about the involvement and the conduct of the accused on the said day.”

There are numerous judgements which state that the FIR must be lodged instantaneously and any unexplained delay in lodging of FIR must be seen with suspicion as it gives room for motivated and after-thought allegations. The FIR lodged against Shahrukh was after a period of around 56 hours without assigning any reasons for the delay. The Ld. Addl Sessions Judge conveniently ignored this argument despite this argument being supported by two Supreme Court judgements.

Moreover, immediately after two days of lodging FIR Constable Deepak Dahiya gave video interviews on 28th February 2020 to various news channels wherein he categorically stated that the Shahrukh had not shot at him. Therefore, the imposition of section 307 is nothing but a gross abuse of power by the police officials in furtherance of their political vendetta. The Ld. Trial Court dismissed the instant bail application by erroneously holding that despite the contradiction of statement given by the complainant Dahiya in his 161 CrPC statement and TV interviews, the TV interviews cannot be relied upon as the said interviews have not been made part of charge-sheet.

The above submission was important for the court to record owing to the fact that the complainant who is the police officer has stated in his FIR that Shahrukh, with the intention to kill him, aimed at his head and shot him and he narrowly escaped whereas in all his media interviews categorically stated that Shahrukh never shot at him. The court shrugged of this glaring statement of the complainant by holding that such media interviews are not part of the chargesheet whilst ignoring the fact that in the instant case the complainant and the investigating agency are the police officials themselves. They cherry-picked evidence of their own choosing.

In stark contravention to such a clear position of the laid down law, Shahrukh has been languishing behind bars for the past 19 months despite the non-commencement of the trial. The trial has been suspended indefinitely, the inhumane brunt of which is being faced by Shahrukh. This indefinite incarceration at the pre-trial stage, when no other investigation is required to be done, directly infringes upon the personal liberty of the petitioner as every accused person is manifestly there is going to be a delay in conducting the trial. The petitioner cannot be made to suffer and must be released on bail as held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. Shahrukh does not just deserve bail but also the courts being the first protectorate of citizens liberty must reprimand the police officials.

It’s been more than 18 months, Shahrukh has two FIRs registered against him. They are FIR 49/2020 and FIR 51/2020, with sections of the Arms Act and Section 307 (attempt to murder) of the IPC.

While under FIR 49, the arguments have ended and the order is awaited from the judge in a Karkardooma Court. In FIR 51, the bail was dismissed by the sessions and Delhi High Court. Since the cases have been put on charge, I have opted to engage the Senior Supreme Court Lawyer to argue in the Sessions Court. We believe that the Judiciary will show mercy considering the fact that whatever happened was an act of self-defence to save hundreds of lives that were attacked by the violent goons amidst deadly riots in North East Delhi last year.

Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this article are the personal opinions of the author. The facts and opinions appearing in the article do not necessarily reflect the views of The Cognate, and The Cognate does not assume any responsibility or liability for the same.