[Jahangirpuri Riots] Delhi High Court dismisses accused's plea alleging harassment by Delhi Police

The Delhi High Court on Thursday dismissed a plea filed by an accused namely Sheikh Ishrafil in connection with the Jahangirpuri riots, seeking directions to Delhi Police not to harass him and his family in the name of interrogation.

Court was hearing a plea filed by Ishrafil who is allegedly one of the main conspirators and perpetrators of the entire incident that took place in Jahangirpuri on April 16, 2022, and was evading the process of law. His elder son has also been arrested for his involvement in the riots.

A single-judge bench of Justice Asha Menon, while rejecting the plea, observed that the counsel for the State rightly stated that the petition appears to be of a phishing kind, seeking anticipatory bail, in the garb of directions to the police not to harass him and his family.

The bench further observed, “In the light of the facts and circumstances, as noted hereinabove, this does not appear to be a case in which the police have contacted the petitioner and his family only with ill-motives to harass them. The police have to find out who were the perpetrators of the various offences committed on April 16, 2022, and as a citizen of this country, it is only to be expected that while the petitioner seeks enforcement of his Fundamental Rights, he would also do his duties and help the police resolve the crime and apprehend the perpetrators.”

A clash had broken out on April 16, on the occasion of Hanuman Jayanti in the Jahangirpuri area of Delhi.

Ishrafil's case was that the police were coming to his resident under the cover of investigations and were subjecting him and his family to harassment. He also claimed that the police were seeking to allege that he and his family members were involved in the riot.

Ishrafil further submitted that his father had expired on April 14, 2022, and according to the Muslim rites and customs, the Teeja of his late father was being performed on April 16, 2022, at the Eidgah C-block, Jahangirpuri where the riots erupted. He contended that Ishrafil’s entire family, including his five sons, were involved in these rites.

On the contrary, Additional Standing Counsel (ASC) for the State contended that during investigations, a large number of people had been identified indulging in rioting, wielding swords, waving and using firearms, pelting stones and glass bottles and as of 12th May 2022, 34 persons and 3 CCLs had been apprehended. He told that others were absconding, including Ishrafil and his son Ashnoor and non-bailable warrants (NBWs) had been issued against them.

The ASC for State further contended that Ishrafil was actively involved in aggravating the situation and was instigating his community by pelting stones, bottles, and attacking the Hanuman Jayanti procession with firearms, swords, bricks, and bottles, and other weapons. "Also, he spread the message amongst the residents and his community to accumulate stones, brick pieces, glass bottles, swords, and other arms, to be used at an appropriate time," State counsel said.

The ASC added that Ishrafil had hatched a deep conspiracy to disturb the communal harmony of the country and the forensic team found bricks, glass, and ceramic pieces, and seized them from the terrace belonging to Ishrafil, apart from other places.

Furthermore, the State counsel contended that in the garb of the present petition, Ishrafil was seeking anticipatory bail, which was not permissible.

Taking note of the submissions, Court said, “This Court finds no reason to issue any directions in the exercise of its powers under Article 226 given the Status Report filed by the State disclosing that the police were only investigating into the offences committed for which FIR has been registered.”

Court quoted the judgment in the case of King-Emporer v. Khwaja Nazir Ahmad, AIR 1945, which was reaffirmed by the Supreme Court in the State of West Bengal and Ors. v. Sampat Lal and Ors. (1985) wherein it was stated that “the functions of the Judiciary and Police are complementary and each must be allowed to exercise its function, with due observance of law and order and a concern for individual liberty.”

Conclusively, Court held, “In these facts and circumstances, it is evident that the petitioner has moved this petition to thwart investigations. The court cannot allow itself to be used in such a fashion, which may lead to interference with the investigations, and which has been always frowned upon by the courts.”

Accordingly, the plea was dismissed.

Case Title: Sheikh Ishrafil v. State (NCT) of Delhi and Ors.