2 weeks ago
Delhi court sentences five to two years for riot attack
A court in Delhi sentenced five men to two years in prison.
The case involved violence at a petrol pump during the 2020 northeast Delhi riots.
The men were convicted of rioting and attacking or obstructing police officers.
They received other shorter sentences as well, but those sentences will run at the same time.
The prosecutor wanted the harshest punishment because the police were trying to stop the riots.
The judge said attacking police was a serious aggravating factor.
However, the judge also considered that the men were first-time offenders and supported their families.
Their release will depend on time already spent in custody and whether they are wanted in another case.
A Delhi court sentenced five men to two years’ rigorous imprisonment for rioting and attacking police during the 2020 northeast Delhi riots.
The case concerned violence at a Bhajanpura petrol pump.
The convicts received additional sentences for rioting, using criminal force, and obstructing public servants, all to run concurrently.
The prosecution sought maximum punishment, calling the acts brazen and harmful to state machinery.
The court cited both the attack’s seriousness and the men’s first-offender status, family responsibilities, and socioeconomic conditions.
- Who
- Five men identified as Arif, Mohd Khalid, Abdul Sattar, Tanveer Ali and Hunain were sentenced; the case was prosecuted by Special Public Prosecutor Madhukar Pandey.
- What
- The men were sentenced for rioting, assaulting or obstructing public servants, and using criminal force against police personnel.
- Where
- The case involved violence at a Bhajanpura petrol pump in northeast Delhi and was heard by a Delhi court.
- When
- The sentencing order was issued on September 24; the men had been convicted on September 9. The violence occurred during the 2020 riots.
- Why
- The court found that the men had attacked and obstructed police personnel who were trying to suppress the riot.
Prosecution and Deterrence
Mitigation and Proportionality
Severity of the conduct
Prosecution and Deterrence
The prosecution argued that the men violently attacked police officers performing their duties and sought maximum punishment.
Mitigation and Proportionality
The court agreed the conduct was serious but found that maximum punishment was not warranted after considering mitigating circumstances.
Impact on public order
Prosecution and Deterrence
The prosecution described the offences as highly brazen anti-social acts that struck at state machinery and said leniency could encourage future riots and anarchy.
Mitigation and Proportionality
The court considered the need for deterrence while also weighing the men’s socioeconomic conditions, first-offender status, and family responsibilities.
Key facts
- Sentence
- Two years’ rigorous imprisonment for each convict under IPC Section 152 read with Section 149.
- Additional sentences
- Each convict also received 1.5 years for rioting and assault or criminal force against public servants, plus two months for obstructing a public servant.
- Concurrent terms
- All sentences will run concurrently.
- Fines
- The court imposed fines under the various applicable provisions.
- Aggravating factors
- The court cited the unlawful mob’s rioting and the assault and obstruction of police suppressing the riot.
- Mitigating factors
- The men were first-time offenders, sole breadwinners, and had not been involved in another criminal activity after the case, according to the court.
- Release status
- The order granted credit for time already spent in custody but did not specifically order immediate release.
Quotes
Additional Sessions Judge Parveen Singh
Judge who presided over the sentencing proceedings
“The socioeconomic conditions of the convicts, the fact that they are first time offenders, the fact that all of them are the sole bread earner of their families and the fact that after this case also, they have not been involved in any other criminal activity; are the mitigating circumstances in favour of the convicts.”
theprint.in
“I find that it is not a case where a very lenient view should be taken as the convicts were involved in a frontal attack upon the State machinery which was involved in maintaining law and order and trying to suppress the riots.”
theprint.in
Sources
Related news
Delhi Court Convicts Tahir Hussain in 2020 Riots Abetment Case
Delhi High Court Again Denies Bail to Khalid, Imam
Delhi High Court Rejects Pleas for Independent Riots Probe
Delhi High Court Dismisses Pleas for Probes Into Riots
Delhi Court Grants Bail to 17 Anti-SIR Protesters
Delhi Police Review Protest Videos Amid Assault Allegations and FIRs
Left Leaders Detained as Students Announce Hunger Strike
Mumbai Police Detain Hundreds at Protest Backing CJP Demonstration
Robin Singh says T10 demands exceptional skills from players
Delhi Golf Club Elects Amandeep Johl as Captain
Priyanka Gandhi Says Delhi Protest Detentions Show Government Fear
