In a detailed order pronounced on Thursday, Judge Pramachala noted that one of the complainants, master Salman, was shot in the thigh by three boys in the morning of February 25.
This was not an act of a riotous mob yet the complaint by Salman was clubbed with the present FIR which was for riot by a mob. This was misconceived and not in consonance with law, the Court observed.
“This illegality was continued in order to report this complaint in the chargesheet in this case, despite the fact that neither Salman had identified accused as one of the culprits, nor IO met any other witness to this incident, who would have claimed having seen accused as one of three boys involved in this incident,” the Court noted.
In September 12, 2021, Salman was examined again under Section 161 CrPC when he gave a slightly different description of the incident to say that it was a mob of some boys that attacked him. However, he denied involvement of any person in the photographs shown to him.
The Court concluded that investigation in Salman’s case was “illegally clubbed” with the case against Javed on the pretext of proximity to the place of incident.
Source: Barandbench
