IB officer murder case: Delhi court defers sentence hearing to July 27
Additional Sessions Judge Praveen Singh adjourns the proceedings after repeated requests by Hussain’s counsel for additional time
A Delhi court on Thursday deferred till July 27 the hearing on the quantum of sentence for former AAP councillor Tahir Hussain and four others convicted in the murder of Intelligence Bureau officer Ankit Sharma after the defence sought more time.
Additional Sessions Judge Praveen Singh adjourned the proceedings after repeated requests by Hussain’s counsel for additional time.
The judge initially was disinclined to grant more time, observing that a convict should not be kept under prolonged uncertainty regarding the sentence.
“There are clear directions that once a person is convicted, he cannot be kept under suspense over his sentence,” the judge said.
Appearing for Hussain, advocates Rajiv Mohan and Tara Narula sought time to prepare their submissions, arguing that the proceedings had reached the sentencing stage, where the consequences were of the utmost seriousness for the accused.
The judge initially rejected the request and asked the parties to proceed with the arguments. However, just as the prosecution was about to begin its submissions, he reconsidered his decision.
“I felt that by not accepting your request, I am rushing the matter and not giving you a proper opportunity to represent your case,” the judge said.
The court then directed the defence to file affidavits disclosing the socio-economic status of the convicts and listed the matter for July 27.
On July 13, the court convicted Hussain and four others for the murder of Sharma, who was attacked by a mob and whose body was later found in a drain during the 2020 northeast Delhi riots.
In its verdict, the court held that Hussain was a member of a heavily armed mob that had assembled with animus against Hindus to commit rioting, arson and loot, and murdered Sharma in a “savage and relentless assault”.
The court said the prosecution had proved that members of the unlawful assembly knew that, in pursuing their common object, “death could result and someone could be killed”.
Hussain was convicted under IPC Sections 302 (murder), 365 (kidnapping or abducting with intent secretly and wrongfully to confine a person), 147 (rioting), 148 (rioting armed with a deadly weapon), 153A (promoting enmity) and 188 (disobedience to an order duly promulgated by a public servant), read with Section 149 (unlawful assembly).
