A Delhi court on Saturday framed attempt to murder, criminal conspiracy and other charges under the Indian Penal Code (IPC) against former Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) councillor Tahir Hussain and others in the Delhi Riots cases [State v. Tanveer Malik & Ors].
Additional Sessions Judge Pulastya Pramachala stated that the accused persons had objective to kill Hindus, destroy their property and cause maximum damage to them.
“You all accused persons along with your other associates (unidentified) from Muslim community, in furtherance to a criminal conspiracy to commit riot, to kill person from Hindu community and to damage their properties, you formed an unlawful assembly, the object whereof was to cause maximum damage to the property belonging to persons from Hindu community and to kill persons from Hindu community,” the judge recorded in his order.
The judge further noted that, the objective was to “commit vandalism and “riot”, by the use of “force and violence”.
In this regard, the judge also cited the example of one Ajay Goswami who was shot in his right hip causing grievous injury to him.
Therefore, the Court framed charges under Sections 307 (attempt to murder), 120B (criminal conspiracy and 149 (unlawful assembly) under the IPC.
Charges were framed against Tahir Hussain, Tanveer Malik, Gulfam, Nazim, Kasim, Shah Alam, Riyasat Ali, Liyakat Ali.
Further, except for Tanveer Malik and Gulfam, charges were also framed under Section 505 (statements conducting to public mischief) of IPC against the other accused persons.
The judge noted that there were statements made in public “to teach a lesson” and “not leave any person from Hindu community”.
“You all accused persons made statement in the public to other members of the unlawful assembly, of which you all were members, so as to teach a lesson and not to leave persons from Hindu community, and thereby you all accused persons committed an offence punishable us 505 IPC and within my cognizance. And I hereby direct that you all be tried by this Court for the aforesaid charges,” the order stated.
