New Delhi: A Delhi court has acquitted former AAP MLA Somnath Bharti in a 2014 case linked to a controversial midnight raid in Delhi’s Malviya Nagar area, where a group of Ugandan women was allegedly assaulted and harassed.
Besides Bharti, 17 other accused had also moved Delhi’s Rouse Avenue court seeking to set aside the FIR registered against them for offences like molestation, voyeurism, unlawful assembly, wrongful confinement, rioting, criminal intimidation, joint liability, assault, trespass, outraging the modesty of a woman, and mischief.
The FIR was registered in January 2014 at the behest of one of the Ugandan women, under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which empowers a magistrate to order the police to investigate any cognizable case. This ensures an FIR is registered when police refuse to act.
Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Neha Mittal acquitted Bharti after observing that the witnesses in the case did not depose before the court, thereby acquitting Bharti and others.
“Accordingly, this court is of the opinion that prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt,” the court said in its 111-page order, citing discrepancies on the police’s part, such as the victim’s statements being inadmissible evidence as they failed to even appear before the court to depose.
Although the police had said there were around 41 prosecution witnesses, including nine African women, the judge noted that the prosecution had failed to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt, as they were not able to even establish the identity of the alleged victims beyond a reasonable doubt.
“It is a matter of record that none of the victims appeared in the witness box and hence, the Court had no opportunity to verify their identity,” the court noted.
It added that even the police could not name a single victim affected by the incident, and neither were any victims named in the charge sheet.
One police officer also told the court that even if the video of the spot was shown to him, he could not identify the African women from the CCTV footage, as they did not hold any ID proof of these victims.
The court also noted that one of the Investigating Officers (IOs) had taken the complainant’s passport and visa copies during the investigation and handed them over to another IO.
“However, the same are admittedly not on record and he further admits not having prepared any seizure memo of the said documents, forcing this Court to doubt if any such documents were ever collected,” the court found.
Also Read: ‘If anything happens to me, Nirmala to blame’: Somnath Bharti’s wife tells court in defamation case
Contradictions and discrepancies
The court also noted material contradictions in eyewitness testimony. It said that the witness statements about being grievously hurt and the accused persons unlawfully assembling at their homes were inadmissible evidence, noting that the remaining eyewitnesses did not “breathe a whisper” regarding the accused persons inflicting injuries upon these victims.
Giving the accused the benefit of doubt, the court also pointed to an unexplained delay in registration of the 2014 FIR, saying that it led to the weakening of the prosecution’s case.
The ruling also said that the prosecution had failed to prove unlawful assembly as well.
The prosecution’s case was that on the night of 15 and 16 January 2014, Bharti, the then law minister of Delhi, and others reached Khirki Extension in Malviya Nagar, and allegedly assaulted Ugandan women living in rented houses there, while accusing them of being involved in illegal activities, including operating a prostitution and drugs trafficking racket.
Subsequently, on 18 January 2014, an FIR was lodged against Bharti after one of the Ugandan women filed a plea seeking to register a criminal complaint against unknown persons who manhandled her, forcibly opened and entered her door, and asked her to produce her passport while accusing her of prostitution.
Although Bharti said that his actions were based on multiple complaints he received from local residents about what they called the nefarious activities of the Ugandans, no drugs were recovered from them that night.
After carrying out a medical test, the court noted that there was no evidence of any injury or even physical assault.
The court also rejected the argument by one of the foreign nationals that an accused had broken her window, saying that only one witness made such an allegation, and that too without any evidence.
Similarly, the court also set aside the charges against Bharti under Section 186, which deals with voluntary obstruction of a public servant performing their official duties, saying that “there must be an overt act or a credible threat capable of preventing a public servant from executing their duties”.
“Though use of physical force is not necessary for a conviction under Section 186 IPC, but the obstruction must transcend mere verbal threats or passive resistance,” the court said, noting that CCTV footage showed no evidence of any altercation between the policemen and the accused in this case.
(Edited by Sugita Katyal)
Also Read: AAP’s Bharti calls out NDA ally Manjhi’s ‘MP-MLAs take cut’ remark, seeks HAM(S) leaders’ audits