Read Time: 05 minutes
Additional Sessions Judge Pulastya Pramachala noted that the allegations made against Umar Khalid and Khalid Saifi relate to an umbrella conspiracy and it is already under consideration in the larger conspiracy case.
While discharging Umar Khalid, Khalid Saifi, and three others in a Delhi Riots 2020 case, Additional Sessions Judge Pulastya Pramachala of the Karkardooma Court in the order stated that the allegations made against them relate to “umbrella conspiracy” and is under consideration.
The court said, “As far as accused Khalid Saifi and Umar Khalid are concerned, I find that allegations made against them relate to Umbrella Conspiracy, rather than conspiracy peculiar to the incident investigated in this case i.e. the incident at Pradeep's parking.”
“I have already discussed the scope of two different conspiracies herein above. Since, Umbrella Conspiracy i.e. larger conspiracy to incite riots in Delhi, is already the subject matter of consideration in FIR 59/2020, PS Crime branch, therefore, these two accused are entitled to discharge in the present case”, the court noted.
ASJ Pramachala explained the concept of “umbrella conspiracy” as the larger conspiracy and several smaller conspiracies hatched under the larger conspiracy, the main objective may be wider than the objective of the smaller conspiracy. The court stated that planning to ignite a communal riot at a large level and taking steps for the prosecution of such a plan, could be umbrella conspiracy, and participants in this conspiracy may or may not be part of each smaller conspiracy and vice versa.
By the same order, the court charged 11 accused persons including Mohd. Tahir Hussain, Liyakat Ali, Riyasat Ali, Shah Alam, Mohd. Shadab, Mohd. Abid, Rashid Saifi, Gulfam @ VIP, Arshad Qayyum, Irshad Ahmad, and Mohd. Rihan@ Arshad Pradhan for offences punishable u/S 120B IPC read with Sections 147, 148, 188, 153A, 323, 395, 435, 436, 454 IPC. Court held them also liable to be tried for offences punishable u/s 147, 148, 186, 188, 153A, 323, 395, 435, 436, 454 IPC r/with 120B and 149 IPC.
While deciding on charges against the 11 accused, ASJ Pramachala noted that in the concerned incident, the person and properties attacked belonged to the “Hindu Community” and the mob made it clear that their objective was to harm Hindus in their body and property to the possible extent.
“Participation and being a member of this mob during the alleged act is sufficient to make all named accused persons liable for the deeds of this mob”, the court said.
Case Title: State v. Mohd. Tahir Hussain & Ors.
Please Login or Register
