New Delhi, Aug 5 A Delhi court has acquitted two men accused of attempting to murder a youth in Seelampur in 2020, saying that the prosecution failed to establish their identity as the assailants and raising serious doubts over the investigation, including alleged recovery of firearms.
Principal District and Sessions Judge Sanjay Sharma was hearing a case against Chauhan Patti alias Ajim and Faeem, who were accused of charges under attempt to murder and Arms Act provisions in a case arising out of an FIR registered at Seelampur police station.
In an order dated August 4, the court said, "The recovery of firearm as alleged from accused Chauhan Patti alias Ajim as well as Faeem becomes highly doubtful, and no reliance can be placed upon it, that too when the complainant neither identified accused Chauhan Patti as his assailant nor identified the weapon so allegedly recovered from the accused."
According to the prosecution, Ashu, the complainant, alleged that he was shot at and injured on June 19, 2020, a day after an altercation with Chauhan Patti and a juvenile. The police claimed that firearms were later recovered from the accused and that Faeem had supplied a weapon used in the incident.
During the trial, however, the injured complainant failed to identify Chauhan Patti as the shooter and disowned his earlier allegations. He told the court that the accused was not the person who had fired at him and claimed police officials had obtained his signatures on blank papers.
The court noted that the complainant not only failed to identify the accused in court but also retracted from his complaint, which formed the basis of the FIR. No other witness, the judge said, was able to establish the identity of the accused as the assailants.
Questioning the prosecution's case on recovery of weapons, the court observed that no independent public witnesses were associated with the alleged recoveries despite the arrests and searches having taken place in densely populated public areas.
"It is highly unlikely" that a person accused of a shooting would continue to roam in a public place carrying the weapon of offence, the court said.
The judge further noted that the doctor who allegedly extracted a bullet from the victim's leg was never examined, leaving a "vital link evidence" missing from the prosecution case.
Holding that the prosecution had failed to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt, the court extended the benefit of doubt to both accused and ordered their acquittal.
