Updated: December 16, 2020 6:08:01 am
The defendants came from several countries, including the United States, Russia, the United Kingdom, France, Sudan, Tunisia, Sri Lanka, Tanzania, the United Kingdom, Thailand, Kazakhstan and Indonesia.
Noting that the prosecution could not “prove the presence of the accused inside the Markaz premises” and point out “contradictions” in the statements of his witnesses, a Delhi court acquitted 36 foreigners who were facing trial for allegedly raping. Covid guidelines while participating in a Tablighi Jamaat event in Nizamuddin in March that was later linked to infections in 14 states.
While the order was being passed, Metropolitan Chief Magistrate Arun Kumar Garg detained the Hazrat Nizamuddin station house officer, who was the whistleblower in the case, and the investigating officer for failure to identify the accused.
Referring to the contradictions in the witness statements, the court recognized the likelihood that some of the defendants will plead guilty that “none of them were present in Markaz during the relevant period and had been picked up at different locations for malicious prosecution according to the instructions of the Ministry of the Interior … “
“It is beyond the understanding of the court, as to how IO (Inspector Satish Kumar) could have identified 952 foreign nationals out of 2,343 people who, according to the SHO, were found to be in breach of the guidelines, without any parade of proof identification ( TIP), but on the basis of the list provided by MHA (Ministry of the Interior), ”the court said.
The court also noted that the SHO, Inspector Mukesh Walia, made improvements to his statement. “The SHO was aware of the actual number of people gathered in Markaz from the beginning and has not yet taken any timely action to ensure the dispersal of such meetings despite knowing the Government’s guidelines,” he said.
“Otherwise, if you weren’t so aware of the actual or even approximate number that remained within Markaz until the last day of the evacuation exercise, it is very likely that you are speaking falsely about your daily visits to Markaz … pass the test. of solvency and therefore the identification by him of the defendants in court is not enough to discharge the burden of the prosecution to prove the presence of the defendant in Markaz during the relevant period, ”said the court.
The defendants came from several countries, including the United States, Russia, the United Kingdom, France, Sudan, Tunisia, Sri Lanka, Tanzania, the United Kingdom, Thailand, Kazakhstan and Indonesia.
Fahim Khan, a lawyer for the defendants, welcomed the ruling and said his clients had been “falsely implicated”. “We argue that of the 36, 10 were not even present at the scene. The police had produced documents showing their presence, which were contradictory. The prosecution could not prove that the defendants did not maintain social distancing or violated other Covid guidelines, “he said.
The verdict was also well received by the defendants. “We are happy with the sentence,” said Irfan Khan (39), a mechanical engineer from Australia, who was on trial with his wife. Irfan said that he had come to Delhi to visit friends and religious sites when he was arrested. Like the other defendant, he spent 60 days in a detention center before being transferred to court-approved accommodation.
“I knew that in India you can win a case if you defend it. In Australia, there was a judge who said that if you want the truth go to a mosque, if you want justice go to a court. That inspired me to fight my case instead of agreeing to a settlement with the prosecution, ”he said.
The 36 were the last of the foreign defendants who were brought to trial in the case. According to court records, the Delhi police charged 952 foreigners with violating Covid violations. More than 900 of them had pleaded guilty as part of a plea deal, as they did not want to stay in India to face trial and wanted to be reunited with their families.
The 36 are among the 44 foreigners who chose to stand trial on charges of violating visa rules and Covid regulations; eight were released in August by the court after it found there was no “prima facie evidence” against them.
The trial began on August 10 following instructions from the Supreme Court and the final arguments were heard for three days starting on December 3.
During the trial, the prosecution argued that “social distancing and other guidelines were not followed and that large concentrations were being held without following social distancing norms and other safety instructions.”
Claiming that the Covid rules were in the public domain, the police argued that “the defendants had maliciously and negligently participated and gathered within the Markaz, thus increasing the spread of the Corona virus infection.”
.
