Why many police cases break up

Five years after deadly religious riots covered the capital of India Delhi, there is no legal closure of people for the participants.

The BBC Hindi analysis found that more than 80% of the cases related to the violence in which the courts gave decisions led to justification or exemptions.

More than 50 people, mostly Muslimswere killed after clashes broke out between Hindus and Muslims because of a controversial law on citizenship in February 2020. The violence – The The most rabbit city has seen In decades – stretched for days, with hundreds of homes and shops set on fire by violent mafia.

BBC in earlier reported incidents with police brutality and complicity during the riotsS Police have denied any misconduct and in their investigation claim that violence is “pre-planned” as part of a greater conspiracy to “threaten the unity of India” than the people who protested against the law.

They registered 758 cases in connection with the investigation and arrested over 2000 people. This included 18 student leaders and activists who were arrested in a case, which became known as a “main case of conspiracy”. They were charged under the Draconian Terrorism Act, which makes it almost impossible to obtain a guarantee. Only six of them have been released for five years and some as an activist Umar Khalid They are still in prison, waiting to start a process.

BBC Hindi examines the status of all 758 cases filed in connection with the riots And he analyzes 126 cases in which the Delhi Carrota Court has made decisions.

More than 80% of these 126 cases have led to excuses or exempts, as witnesses have become hostile or do not support the prosecutor's case. Only 20 of these cases saw sentences.

According to Indian legislation, the accused is released when the court closes a case without a process, as there is insufficient evidence to move forward. It is an acquittal when the court finds the accused, which is not guilty after a complete process.

In 62 of the 758 cases that were filed on the murder -related charges, there was only one sentence and four acquittals, affordable BBC data through the right to Information Law of India.

A detailed analysis of 126 orders has also shown that in dozens of cases the court has come down to the police in Delhi for gaps in investigations. In some cases, he criticizes the police for submitting “predefined tables of accusations” that “falsely replace” the accused.

In most of the 126 cases, police officers were presented as witnesses to the events. But for various reasons, the court did not find its testimony to be reliable.

Judges have indicated discrepancies in police statements, delayed when identifying the accused by the police, and in some cases doubts whether The police even attended when the violence broke out.

In two commandments, the judge said he could not “prevent” to say that when the story looked back at the riots, “the failure of the investigative agency to conduct a proper investigation will” torture the guards of democracy. ” The court was heard cases filed against three men on charges of arson and robbery – but concluded that they had been arrested without any “real or effective investigation”.

Delhi police did not respond to the BBC request for comment. In a report filed last April, police had told the court that all investigations had been conducted in a “reliable, fair and impartial manner”.

However, the testimonies of some of the defendants and even the court's own observations raise questions about the investigation.

Shadab Alam, who spent 80 days in prison, says he can never forget the terror of riots.

He was a shelter on the roof terrace of a medicine store where he works with several others.

Just hours earlier, police had arrived at the store and asked them to close it because of the ongoing arson.

“Suddenly they (the police) came again and took a few of us in their van,” he told the BBC.

When he asked the police why he had been taken, he said he had been accused of involvement in riots.

“We were asked by our names and defeated us. Almost all arrested were Muslims,” ​​said G -n -Alam. He added that he had filed his medical report to court, which confirmed three injuries.

In his official report, police charged G -n -Alam and 10 other Muslims for burning a shop. But the court released them before the process began.

In its observations, the court criticized the police investigation, saying that the witness's statements could be “artificially prepared” and that “by all probabilities” the store was burned by a “crowd of Hindu community”.

It says that the police did not pursue the case in this direction, even though it was present when the incident happened.

G -n -Alam had to wait four years to formally conclude the case.

“All this happened during the Covid-19 pandemic. There was a lock. We were in a state of rage,” said Dilshad Ali, Alam's father.

“In the end, nothing was proven. But we had to spend so much time and money to prove our innocence.”

He said the family wanted monetary compensation for their losses. “If the police do a false case against my son, then action must be taken against them,” he added.

In another case, the court justified the Sandip Bhati, who was accused of dragging and staying a Muslim during the riots.

Police have introduced two videos to show that G -n Bhati is the culprit. But in court, his lawyer told him that the police had filed an incomplete clip to frame his client.

In the full video that the BBC confirms, the Bhati shows that he is saving the Muslim man instead of beating him.

In its order in January, the court ruled that the police were “manipulating” the video to “frame” G -n Bhati instead of tracking the “actual culprits”.

He also asked the Delhi Police Commissioner to take appropriate action against the investigating officer in the case. Police did not answer the BBC Hindi question about whether it's done.

G -n Bhati, who spent four months in prison, declined to comment, saying he did not want to discuss his “test”.

With so many acquittals, former Supreme Court judge Madan Lokur said that prosecutors and police “must sit down to perceive what they have achieved in five years.”

He also said that “accountability must also be determined on the prosecutor's office if the arrest is found to be illegal or unnecessary.”

“If the prosecutor's office puts someone in prison because they have the power to do it or because they want to do it, they should not be allowed to get out if it is found that imprisonment is illegal or unnecessary,” he added.

Even when some cases fall apart in the courts, many of the arrested are still imprisoned in anticipation of a lawsuit.

Gulfisha Fatima, a 33-year-old doctor of doctors, is among 12 activists who are still in prison on charges of being “conspirators” of riots.

Her family said three other police cases were filed against her and she received a guarantee in all of them. But it continues to face imprisonment in the fourth case under the Law on Illegal Activities (Prevention) (UAPA), the strict terrorism law, which sets extremely challenging conditions for a guarantee.

“As she went to prison, with each hearing, we hope she will finally come out,” her father Side Tashaf Hussein told the BBC.

In the case of Da -ja Fatima, after months of hearing on the grounds for a guarantee, the judge from the Supreme Court in Delhi is transferred in 2023 and now the whole case is being heard again.

“Sometimes I wonder if I can see her or die before that,” said G -n Hussein.

Follow BBC News India on Instagram., YouTube, Twitter and FacebookS