DT
PT
Subscribe To Print Edition About The Tribune Code Of Ethics Download App Advertise with us Classifieds
search-icon-img
search-icon-img
Advertisement

Delhi Court orders FIR against SHO for forcing people to sing national anthem

A Delhi court directed the Delhi Police to register an FIR against the Station House Officer (SHO) of theh Jyoti Nagar police station. The SHO is accused of allegedly forcing the complainant and others to sing the national anthem and...
  • fb
  • twitter
  • whatsapp
  • whatsapp
Advertisement

A Delhi court directed the Delhi Police to register an FIR against the Station House Officer (SHO) of theh Jyoti Nagar police station. The SHO is accused of allegedly forcing the complainant and others to sing the national anthem and chant slogans like "Vande Mataram" and "Jai Shri Ram" during the 2020 Delhi riots.

Advertisement

The complainant, Mohd Waseem, claimed he was part of a group that was beaten up by police officers, who then allegedly forced them to sing the national anthem and chant religious slogans. A video of the incident went viral on social media.

Judicial Magistrate First Class Udbhav Kumar Jain, while disposing of the case, ordered that an FIR be registered against SHO Tomar, who was in-charge of Jyoti Nagar police station during the riots in February-March 2020. The FIR will be filed under Sections 295-A (outraging religious feelings), 323 (voluntarily causing hurt), 342 (wrongful confinement), and 506 (criminal intimidation) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

Advertisement

In the order dated January 18, 2025, the court also directed the current SHO to assign a responsible officer, not below the rank of Inspector, to investigate the matter. It further stated that the role of other unknown police officials involved in the alleged offences could be determined during the investigation.

The court noted that the SHO other unknown police officials engaged themselves in hate crimes against the complainant/victim and they cannot be protected under the garb of sanction as alleged offences committed by them cannot be said to have been committed while acting or purporting to act in the discharge if their official duty.

Advertisement

It criticised the Action Taken Report (ATR) for failing to address the issue of CCTV footage pertaining to the date of the alleged incident, which should have been investigated by the officer concerned.

In his complaint, the victim had alleged that during the riots, he was searching for his mother when he encountered an unlawful assembly that included BJP leader Kapil Mishra. The complainant claimed Mishra fired gunshots at protesters while his accomplices pelted stones and threw petrol bombs. When the police started firing tear gas, the complainant tried to flee but was caught by police officers who allegedly began abusing and beating him. The victim further claimed that the police were complicit with Mishra and his associates.

The complainant said that four policemen then threw him into a place where other injured individuals were lying. He alleged that the officers began beating them and forced them to sing the national anthem and chant slogans.

The court also noted, “While the ATR in the present matter was called regarding the complete allegations made by the complainant, but it seems that the IO was more concerned about the police officials and either he failed to make inquiry against the alleged accused no.3 (Kapil Mishra), or he tried to cover up the allegations against the said accused.”

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
tlbr_img1 Classifieds tlbr_img2 Videos tlbr_img3 Premium tlbr_img4 E-Paper tlbr_img5 Shorts