Delhi District Court
State vs Lokesh Solanki And Others on 28 March, 2025
CNR No. DLNE01-002728-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 137/2020, FIR No. 103/2020, PS Gokalpuri
DLNE010027282020
IN THE COURT OF SH. PULASTYA PRAMACHALA
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE-03,
NORTH-EAST DISTRICT
KARKARDOOMA COURTS: DELHI
INDEX
Sl. HEADINGS Page Nos.
No.
1 Description of Case & Memo of Parties 2-3
2 Case set up by the Prosecution 4-8
3 Charges 8-9
4 Description of Prosecution Evidence 9-24
5 Plea of accused under Section 351 BNSS 24
6 Arguments of Defence & Prosecution 24-29
APPRECIATION OF FACTS AND EVIDENCE
7 Unlawful Assembly & Riot 29-32
8 Identification of accused persons 32-36
9 Conclusion and Decision 36
Digitally signed
by PULASTYA
PULASTYA PRAMACHALA
PRAMACHALA Date:
2025.03.28
10:53:03 +0530
Page 1 of 36 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CNR No. DLNE01-002728-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 137/2020, FIR No. 103/2020, PS Gokalpuri
Sessions Case No. : 137/2020
Under Section : 147/148/149/302/201/153-A/
505/188/427/120B IPC
Police Station : Gokalpuri
FIR No. : 103/2020
CNR No. : DLNE01-002728-2020
In the matter of: -
STATE
VERSUS
1. Lokesh Solanki
S/o. Sh. Yogender Kumar,
R/o. H.No. C-5/47, 4th Floor,
Yamuna Vihar, Delhi-53.
2. Pankaj Sharma
S/o. Late Sh. Rajveer Sharma,
R/o. H.No. C-162, Gali No.3,
Bhagirathi Vihar, Delhi-94.
3. Ankit Chaudhary @ Fouzi
S/o. Sh. Rajkumar,
R/o. H.No. G-14, Gali No. 2, G-Block,
Ganga Vihar, Gokalpuri, Delhi-94;
4. Prince
S/o. Sh. Mahender Singh,
R/o. H.No. C-33, Gali No.2,
Bhagirathi Vihar, Delhi-94.
5. Jatin Sharma @ Rohit
S/o. Sh. Gourishankar Sharma,
R/o. H.No. C-101, DLF,
Dilshad Extension-II, Ghaziabad,
Sahibabad, U.P.-201005.
6. Himanshu Thakur
S/o. Sh. Harender,
R/o. H.No. F-19, 1st Floor, Flat No.1,
Ekta Society, DLF-Ankur Vihar, Loni, Ghaziabad, U.P.
Page 2 of 36 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CNR No. DLNE01-002728-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 137/2020, FIR No. 103/2020, PS Gokalpuri
7. Vivek Panchal @ Nandu
S/o. Sh. Pramod Kumar Panchal,
R/o. H.No. D-106, Gali No.4, Ganga Vihar, Delhi-94.
8. Rishabh Chaudhary
S/o. Sh. Yogender Singh,
R/o. H.No. F-53, Gali No.1,
Ganga Vihar, Gokalpuri, Delhi-94.
9. Sumit @ Badshah
S/o. Late. Sh. Om Prakash,
R/o. H.No. A-367, Gokalpuri, Delhi.
10. Sahil @ Babu
S/o. Late Sh. Rakesh Sharma,
R/o. H.No. D-138, Gali No.11,
Bhagirathi Vihar, Delhi-94.
11. Sandeep Kumar @ Mogli
S/o. Late Sh. Dalveer Singh,
R/o. H.No. E-24, Gali No.3,
Bhagirati Vihar, Delhi-94.
12. Tinku Arora
S/o. Sh. Ashok Kumar,
R/o. H.No. E-51, Gali No.2,
Bhagirathi Vihar, Delhi-94.
...Accused persons
Complainant: PSI Ashish Garg
Date of Institution : 29.06.2020
Date of reserving Judgment : 24.03.2025
Date of pronouncement : 28.03.2025
Decision : All accused are acquitted.
(Section 481 BNSS complied with by all the accused persons)
Page 3 of 36 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CNR No. DLNE01-002728-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 137/2020, FIR No. 103/2020, PS Gokalpuri
JUDGMENT
CASE SET UP BY THE PROSECUTION: –
1. The above-named accused persons have been chargesheeted by
the police for offences punishable under Section
147/148/149/302/201/153-A/505/427/188/427/120B IPC.
2. As per chargesheet, on 01.03.2020 a PCR call was received at
09:33:31 hours, through telephone no.9717249122 informing that
near Nala, Gokalpuri, Ganga Vihar, Shamshan Ghat, Delhi, a
dead body was lying in Nala. In this regard, DD No.7-A was
recorded in PS Gokalpuri. This DD No.7-A was marked to PSI
Ashish Garg. On receipt of DD No.7-A, PSI Ashish Garg along
with Ct. Rahul, reached at Bhagirathi Nala, Gokalpuri, Ganga
Vihar, Shamshan Ghat, Delhi. They found that one male dead
body was lying in the Nala. Dead body was in decomposed
condition. The dead body was taken out from the Nala and
removed to RML Hospital, where it was declared brought dead
by the doctor vide MLC No. E-45042/188347. Dead body was
preserved at mortuary, RML hospital for 72 hours and Ct. Rahul
was deployed there. On 01.03.2020, Crime Team was called at
the spot and scene of crime was inspected and photographed.
3. On the basis of these facts and tehrir prepared by PSI Ashish
Garg, on 03.03.2020 DO/ASI Yashbir Singh registered this FIR
No.103/2020 u/s. 147/148/149/302/201 IPC. Insp. Jagdish Yadav
was assigned further investigation of the present case.
4. As per chargesheet, IO/Insp. Jagdish Yadav prepared site plan,
sent a W.T. message for identification of the dead body and
recorded statement of witnesses. A request letter regardingPage 4 of 36 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CNR No. DLNE01-002728-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 137/2020, FIR No. 103/2020, PS Gokalpuriconstitution of medical board to obtain medical opinion was sent
vide letter no. 1172 SO-DCP/NORTH-EAST DISTRICT, DELHI
DATED 02.03.2020, by the DCP, North-East District to the
Medical Superintendent, RML Hospital, Delhi.
5. The postmortem examination of the dead body of deceased
Aamin, was conducted vide PM No.163/20 by Autopsy Board
Members on 06.03.2020 in RML hospital. As per postmortem
report dated 06.03.2020, as many as 18 external injuries were
found on the body of the deceased. Cause of death was opined as
“head injury and its complication due to blunt force impact”. The
dead body was identified on 13.03.2020, by father of deceased
namely Shahabuddin. Dead body of deceased was handed over to
his father.
6. As per chargesheet, on 25.02.2020 at about 09:30 PM, deceased
Aamin was killed by the rioters and thrown in Nala, near C-
Block, Bhagirathi Vihar, when he was coming on foot from
Brijpuri Pulia. During the course of investigation, exhibits
collected during postmortem of deceased Amin i.e. Tooth and
Blood on gauze, were sent to FSL, Rohini, Delhi, after taking
blood sample of his parents namely Sh. Shahbuddin and Smt.
Amir Bano. In this regard, FSL result was received wherein it
was mentioned that Sh. Shahbuddin and Smt. Amir Bano, were
the biological parents of deceased Amin.
7. On 28.03.2020, present case was transferred to SIT-III/Crime
Branch for further investigation and same was entrusted to Insp.
Kailash Chander on 03.04.2020. On 03.04.2020, IO/Insp. Kailash
Chander along with the police team visited place of recovery of
Page 5 of 36 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CNR No. DLNE01-002728-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 137/2020, FIR No. 103/2020, PS Gokalpuri
dead body i.e. Main Ganda Nala, Bhagirathi Vihar, Delhi. At that
place one secret informer met him and informed that one person
was killed at that place by some persons namely Lokesh Kumar,
Pankaj Sharma, Ankit Chaudhary @ Fauzi, Sumit Chaudhary @
Badshah and Prince and they had been arrested by the Crime
Branch in their case. On inquiry from SHO PS Gokalpuri, IO
came to know that one case in respect of same place of
occurrence was registered at PS Gokalpuri in FIR No.35/20,
which was being investigated by Insp. Vinay Tyagi, posted in
STARS-II, Shakarpur, Crime Branch, Delhi. IO/Insp. Kailash
Chander contacted Insp. Vinay Tyagi, who informed that afore-
said persons had already been arrested in that FIR.
8. Thereafter, IO/Insp. Kailash Chander along with staff visited
STARS-II, Shakarpur, Crime Branch, Delhi and met Insp. Vinay
Tyagi, who told IO that on 07.03.2020 he had seized mobile
phones of Mohit Sharma, Shivam Bhardwaj and Dimple Pal.
During analysis, he found these three persons to be members of
one WhatsApp Group namely “Kattar Hindut Ekta”. Said
WhatsApp group was created on 25.02.2020. Accused Lokesh
Solanki was also found to be member of that WhatsApp group.
Upon interrogation, accused Lokesh Solanki was arrested in this
case. Thereafter, on the basis of material collected by the IO
coupled with the disclosure statement of accused Lokesh Solanki,
other accused namely Pankaj Sharma, Sumit Chaudhary, Ankit
Chaudhary, Prince, Jatin Sharma @ Rohit, Rishabh Chaudhary @
Tapas, Vivek @ Panchal @ Nandu and Himanshu Thakur, were
also arrested in this case. IO also recorded statement of several
Page 6 of 36 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CNR No. DLNE01-002728-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 137/2020, FIR No. 103/2020, PS Gokalpuri
witnesses including Narottam Singh, Aman Saxena, Nisar
Ahmad, Mohit Sharma, Shivam Bhardwaj, Dimple Pal and
Deepak Singh, in the present case.
9. CD containing the videography of the postmortem along with
certificate u/s. 65-B of I.E. Act was collected from the
videographer Sh. Ankit Srivastav and IO recorded his statement.
After completion of investigation, on 29.06.2020 main
chargesheet was filed against accused Lokesh Solanki, Pankaj
Sharma, Ankit Chaudhary @ Fauzi, Prince, Jatin Sharma @
Rohit, Himanshu Thakur, Vivek Panchal @ Nandu, Rishabh
Chaudhary @ Tapas and Sumit Chaudhary @ Badshah, for
offences punishable under Section 147/148/149/302/201/120-B
IPC. This chargesheet was filed before ld. Duty MM (North-
East), Karkardooma Courts, Delhi. On 06.10.2020, ld. CMM/NE
took cognizance of afore-said offences and summoned above-
mentioned nine (9) accused persons.
10. On 15.10.2020, first supplementary chargesheet along with copy
of complaint u/s. 195 Cr.P.C. and additional documents, was filed
before ld. CMM (North-East), Karkardooma Courts, Delhi.
Section 153-A/505/188 IPC were also added in the present case,
through this supplementary charge-sheet. Thereafter, case was
committed to the court of sessions vide order dated 21.10.2020.
11. On 04.06.2021, second supplementary chargesheet along with
and other additional documents and impleading three additional
accused persons namely Sahil @ Babu, Sandeep @ Mogli and
Tinku Arora, was filed before Duty MM/NE. This supplementary
chargesheet was sent by ld. CMM/NE to the court of sessions
Page 7 of 36 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CNR No. DLNE01-002728-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 137/2020, FIR No. 103/2020, PS Gokalpuri
vide order dated 30.10.2021.
12. On 07.12.2021, third supplementary chargesheet along with copy
of complaint u/s. 195 Cr.P.C. and copy of sanction u/s. 196
Cr.P.C., was filed directly before my ld. Predecessor.
13. On 13.09.2024, fourth supplementary chargesheet along with
hard-disk stated to be mirror copy of data retrieved by CERT-In,
was filed directly before this court.
CHARGES
14. On 04.04.2022, charges were framed against accused 1. Lokesh
Kumar Solanki @ Rajput 2. Pankaj Sharma, 3. Ankit Chaudhary
@ Fauzi, 4. Prince @ D.J Wala, 5. Jatin Sharma @ Rohit, 6.
Himanshu Thakur, 7. Vivek Panchal @ Nandu, 8. Rishabh
Chaudhary @ Tapash 9. Sumit Chaudhary @ Badshah, 10. Tinku
Arora, 11. Sandeep @ Mogli and 12. Sahil @ Babu for offences
punishable under Section 144/147/148/302/427/432/435/34 IPC
read with Section 149 IPC, to which they pleaded not guilty and
claimed trial. The charges were framed in following terms: –
“That from the early morning of 25.02.2020 till the late
night of 26.02.2020, in the area at or around main Ganda Nala
Road, near C-Block, Bhagirathi Vihar, Delhi, within the
jurisdiction of PS Gokalpuri, all of you being members of
unlawful assembly along with your other associates(identified &
unidentified) formed an unlawful assembly carrying deadly
weapons like lathis, sticks(danda), stones, swords and other
arms, used force or violence in prosecution of a common object
i.e. committed rioting and you all knew being members of the
aforesaid unlawful assembly that offences were likely to be
committed in prosecution of that common object and thereby
committed offences punishable under Section(s)144/147/148
IPC read with Section 149 IPC and within my cognizance.
Page 8 of 36 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CNR No. DLNE01-002728-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 137/2020, FIR No. 103/2020, PS GokalpuriSecondly, in the night of 26/02/2020, exact time
unknown, at or around main Ganda Nala Road, near C-Block,
Bhagirathi Vihar, Delhi,, you all being members of said unlawful
assembly along with your other associates (identified and
unidentified) used force or violence in prosecution of a common
object and in furtherance of common intention committed
murder of Aamin s/o Sahabuddin merely on account of the fact
that he belonged to the other community and thereafter threw his
dead body in the Bhagirathi Vihar ganda nala with a view to
conceal/destroy his identity and also committed mischief by fire
or explosive substance by setting on fire several vehicles etc.in
the area in question and thereby you all along with your other
associates (identified and unidentified) committed offences
punishable under Section(s) 302/427/432/435/34 IPC read with
Section 149 IPC and within my cognizance.”
DESCRIPTION OF PROSECUTION EVIDENCE
15. Several witnesses were dropped on the basis of admission of
documents under Section 294 Cr.P.C./330 BNSS and prosecution
examined 26 witnesses in support of its case, as per following
description: –
Sl. No. & Role of Witness & Description of Proved
Name of Testimony documents/
Witness case properties
PW1/Sh. He was resident of F-442A, gali no.8, Ganga Vihar,
Nartottam Gokalpuri in February 2020. On 26.02.2020, at about
Singh 8/8.30 p.m. he was sitting on a pipe line situated near
the temple, which was at a distance of about 100
meters from his home. At that time, he saw a mob
coming from the side of Bhagirathi Vihar and was
going towards Johripur pulia. The said mob was
chasing two bikers. After reaching at the cross road,
break was applied by the bikers and the pillion rider
jumped in the nala. The other biker left the bike and
started running away, who was over powered by that
mob near a sewage filter plant of MCD at some
distance from that cross road. The mob gave beatingsPage 9 of 36 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CNR No. DLNE01-002728-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 137/2020, FIR No. 103/2020, PS GokalpuriSl. No. & Role of Witness & Description of Proved
Name of Testimony documents/
Witness case properties
to that biker and threw him in the nala. They also threw
that bike into nala and it caught fire. Thereafter he
came back to temple and made a call at 100 number.
PW-1 did not support the case of prosecution and was
declared hostile by ld. SPP on certain points as well as
on the point of identification of accused persons.
PW2/Nisar He was residing at E-61/1, main nala road, near
Ahmed Johripur pulia, Bhagirathi Vihar alongwith his family
in February 2020. On 26.02.2020, in the morning, he
was at the home of his brother-in-law Anwar. His
brother Esh Mohammad was stuck at the house of his
sister Ameena near Johripur pulia. He requested
Avdhesh Mishra to lock his home and to rescue his
brother from the house of Ameena. His niece Sitara,
who resided near his house requested him to rescue
her. When he reached Bhagirathi Vihar, he did not go
ahead as he was hearing noise of hue and cry but he
had not personally seen assault to any person.
PW-2 also did not support the case of prosecution and
turned hostile by ld. SPP on the aspect of identification
of some accused and some part of incident.
PW3 He was resident of C-129, Bhagirathi Vihar, Delhi. He
Shivam was using a mobile phone make Realme using
Bhardwaj no.7217779080 of Jio company, during aforesaid
period from 24.02.2020 to 26.02.2020. He was
member of certain WhatsApp group during that period.
His afore-said mobile phone was taken from him in the
Crime Branch. He identified his signature at circle X
on the seizure memo of WhatsApp Chat dated
08.03.2020 with print of chats (39 pages), which was
placed in the file of FIR No.35/20 of PS Gokalpuri.
Said mobile phone is Ex.PW3/Article-1 in that FIR.
PW3 did not support the case of prosecution and he
was also declared hostile on the point of knowing some
accused and about confession made by Lokesh for
Page 10 of 36 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CNR No. DLNE01-002728-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 137/2020, FIR No. 103/2020, PS Gokalpuri
Sl. No. & Role of Witness & Description of Proved
Name of Testimony documents/
Witness case properties
killing Muslim persons alongwith other accused
persons.
PW4/Mohit He was working in Khaibar Pas Metro Depot as
Sharma technician. Crime branch officials had taken him
alongwith Shivam and Dimple, to their office and had
taken mobile phones of all three of them. PW4 was
added in a WhatsApp group namely Kattar Hindut and
crime branch officials had checked contents of all three
mobile phones, which were seized. His mobile phone
was exhibited as PW4/Article-1 in FIR 35/20 PS
Gokalpuri.
PW4 also did not support the case of prosecution and
he was also declared hostile on the point of knowing
some accused and about confession made by Lokesh
for killing Muslim persons alongwith other accused
persons and about knowing the chats in the Whats App
group.
PW5 He was user of mobile phone no.9873723713, which
Dimple was registered in his name and he was also using
another number from the same set i.e. 8383847939.
PW5 did not support the case of prosecution and he
was also declared hostile on the point of being member
of the Whats App group.
PW6/Aman He was residing at B-4/A, gali no.1, Bhagirathi Vihar,
Saxena in February 2020. He narrated the incident of
24.02.2020. On 25.02.2020, PW6 did not go any where
and remained at his home.
PW-6 did not support the case of prosecution and was
declared hostile by ld. SPP on the point of being eye
witness to the incident at Johripur Pulia on 25.02.2020
at 9.30 P.M.
PW7 He was running a Photo Studio at Ex.PW7/A
Chokha B-15, Ganga Vihar, Delhi in the (certificate u/s
Singh name and style of M/s Deepak Photo 65B of IE Act);
Page 11 of 36 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CNR No. DLNE01-002728-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 137/2020, FIR No. 103/2020, PS Gokalpuri
Sl. No. & Role of Witness & Description of Proved
Name of Testimony documents/
Witness case properties
Studio. Ex.PW7/P1 to
On 01.03.2020, on calling of police Ex.PW7/P12
officer Ashish Garg, PW7 took 7-8 (photographs)
photographs of dead body lying near
Bhagirathi nala. PW7 took printouts
of those photographs and handed
over to Ashish Garg at PS Gokalpuri.
PW7 identified those photographs.
PW7 identified his signature at circle
X on the certificate u/s 65B of I.E.
Act, in respect of those photographs.
PW8/Sh. He was Alternate Nodal Officer in Ex.PW8/B,
Pawan Vodafone Idea Ltd. PW8 brought Ex.PW8/C,
Singh and proved certified copy of CDRs; Ex.PW8/F,
certified copy of digital CAFs; Ex.PW8/H,
certificate u/s. 65 B of IE Act in Ex.PW8/K,
respect of mobile no. 8929509153, Ex.PW8/L,
9990291257, 9582050046 and Ex.PW8/M
9136034019. (certified copy
of CDRs and
digital CAFs)
Ex.PW8/D,
Ex.PW8/I and
Ex.PW8/N
(certificate u/s
65B IE Act)
Ex.PW8/O
(Cell ID chart)
PW9/ He was Alternate Nodal Officer in Ex.PW9/A to
Praveen Reliance Jio. PW9 brought and Ex.PW9/P
Kumar proved certified copy of CDRs; (certified copy
certified copy of digital CAFs; of CDRs and
certificate u/s. 65 B of IE Act in digital CAFs)
respect of mobile no. 8178589464, Ex.PW9/Q,
7557223533, 8368434228, (certificate u/s
Page 12 of 36 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CNR No. DLNE01-002728-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 137/2020, FIR No. 103/2020, PS Gokalpuri
Sl. No. & Role of Witness & Description of Proved
Name of Testimony documents/
Witness case properties
7557497409, 8200894425, 65B IE Act)
8920973748, 7505868790 and Ex.PW9/R
7000094098. (Cell ID chart)
PW10/ PW10 was father of deceased Amin. In the year 2020
Shahuddin before the festival of Holi, on 24th day of month,
Amin left his village for Delhi. Amin was going to
his younger brother Nizamuddin, who was staying in
Mustafabad. On 25th day, PW-10 made telephonic
call to Nizamuddin to enquire about Amin, but he
told PW10 that Amin had not reached there. On 26 th
day, it was informed to PW-10 by Nizamuddin that
Amin had not reached at his place. Thereafter, when
PW-10 alongwith 3-4 persons from his village came
to Delhi, he came to know from Nizamuddin that
Amin had died. In GTB hospital, PW-10 identified
the dead body of Amin. He called his wife to Delhi
and thereafter they visited GTB Hospital, where their
blood sample was taken by the doctor.
PW11/HC On 24.02.2020, an order passed by DCP, North-East
Pradeep u/s. 144 Cr.P.C., was received through Dak in the
morning and on the directions of SHO, PW11 obtained
loud hailer from malkhana and announced the
proclamation u/s. 144 Cr.P.C. in the jurisdictional area
of PS Gokalpuri i.e. Johripur Extension, Ganga Vihar,
Chaman Park, Indira Vihar, Bhagirathi Vihar, Sanjay
Colony, Gokalpuri and Gokalpuri Village.
PW12/Arun
was e He was working as Scientist, Cyber Ex.PW12/A
Kumar Forensic Lab, CERT-In, Ministry of (OSR)
Sahani Electronics, Government of India, (Report),
New Delhi. On 17.04.2020, he Ex.PW12/B
received request letter from Crime (OSR
branch in FIR No. 35/20, PS (certificate
Gokalpuri, alongwith 5 sealed u/s 65B of
packets and other documents. These IE Act)
exhibits were assigned to PW12 and Ex.PW12/C
Page 13 of 36 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CNR No. DLNE01-002728-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 137/2020, FIR No. 103/2020, PS Gokalpuri
Sl. No. & Role of Witness & Description of Proved
Name of Testimony documents/
Witness case properties
his Incharge Lt. Colonel Santosh (OSR
Khadsare. PW12 extracted data from (forwarding
the digital exhibits i.e. mobile letter)
phones, SIM cards and memory Ex.PW12/D
cards as contained in those 5 sealed (OSR
packets. The extracted data were (report
copied/stored in a pendrive and a dt.22.09.202
certificate u/s 65B of IE Act was 0)
issued in respect of the same in FIR
Ex.PW12/E
No. 35/20. PW12 again received
(OSR)
another request letter dt.07.09.2020
(certificate u/s
in FIR No.35/20, alongwith sealed
65B of IE
packets of exhibits as sent back by
Act)
this witness to the police. This time,
Ex.PW12/F
PW12 examined exhibits A1-MOB,
(OSR)
A2-MOB and A3-MOB, alongwith
their related SIMs and memory (forwarding
cards. PW12 extracted data from the letter)
same in another pendrive vide report Ex.PW12/G
in FIR No. 35/20 and issued a fresh (forwarding
certificate, in respect of the same. He letter)
had prepared two copies of that Ex.PW12/H
pendrive and all these exhibits and (certificate
pendrives were sealed and sent back. u/s 65B of
PW12 proved certificate u/s. 63 BSA IE Act)
in respect of mirror copy of extracted Ex.PW12/I
data. (forwarding
letter)
Ex.PW12/
Article-1
(pendrive
with its
contents)
PW13/Sh. He was working as Deputy Ex.PW13/
L.K. Secretary (Home), GNCT, Delhi. A
Page 14 of 36 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CNR No. DLNE01-002728-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 137/2020, FIR No. 103/2020, PS Gokalpuri
Sl. No. & Role of Witness & Description of Proved
Name of Testimony documents/
Witness case properties
Gautam On receipt of a request from Delhi (sanction
Police, thereby seeking sanction u/s order)
196 Cr.P.C for offences u/s Ex.A-1
153A/505 IPC against accused Jatin (sanction
Sharma and co-accused persons against co-
Lokesh, Pankaj Sharma, Sumit accused
Chaudhary, Prince, Rishabh persons
Chaudhary, Ankit Chaudhary, Vivek Sandeep,
Panchal and Himanshu Thakur, Sahil and
matter was referred to Legal Branch Tinku)
for the purpose of examining the
materials. Alongwith request,
chargesheet, copy of FIR,
supplementary chargesheet,
disclosure statement of accused
persons, seizure memos, arrest
memos, transcript of WhatsApp
chats etc. were also received, which
were sent to legal team. On the
basis of requisition made by Legal
Branch, Delhi Police was sent
request to provide additional
documents and information, which
were sent by Delhi Police and
thereafter Legal Team vetted the
file, which was forwarded to Lt.
Governor of GNCT of Delhi. Lt.
Governor approved for according
sanction and PW13 being
competent officer to sign the
sanction order on behalf of LG,
issued sanction orders.
PW14/ACP On 21.04.2020, IO called Ex.PW14/A
Mahesh draughtman PW14/ACP Mahesh, to (site plan)
the place of incident. PW14 took
Page 15 of 36 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CNR No. DLNE01-002728-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 137/2020, FIR No. 103/2020, PS Gokalpuri
Sl. No. & Role of Witness & Description of Proved
Name of Testimony documents/
Witness case properties
measurement of that place at the
instance of PW15 and PW22.
Thereafter, on 18.05.2020, PW14
prepared and handed over a scaled
site plan of that place to IO.
PW15/SI He was posted in PS Gokalpuri and Ex.PW15/A
Ashish Garg on 01.03.2020, he was assigned DD (identification
no. 7A for action. PW15 alongwith memo)
Ct. Rahul reached on the back side of
cremation ground, Ganga Vihar and
found a dead body lying in the drain.
That dead body was taken out of
drain and was sent to RML Hospital.
PW15 called crime team at that
place. In RML Hospital, doctor
formally declared the body dead vide
a MLC. PW15 made a request to
preserve that body and left Ct. Rahul
at that place. 06.03.2020, on the
instructions of IO, he went to RML
Hospital along with photographer
Ankit Shrivastava, to get conducted
postmortem examination of dead
body. PW15 gave a request letter for
this purpose to the doctor in
mortuary. PW15 signed over the
dead body identification memo. On
09.03.2020, on the instructions of
IO/Insp. Jagdish Yadav, PW15 had
taken 3 sealed parcels and sample
seal of the doctor from RML
Hospital and on 11.03.2020, he took
the same to FSL Rohini and
deposited the same. PW15 also
collected photographs from the office
Page 16 of 36 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CNR No. DLNE01-002728-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 137/2020, FIR No. 103/2020, PS Gokalpuri
Sl. No. & Role of Witness & Description of Proved
Name of Testimony documents/
Witness case properties
of mobile crime team and PM report
from RML Hospital. PW15 had also
taken IO/Insp. Jagdish Yadav to the
place of recovery of dead body and
IO prepared a site plan.
PW16/ Insp. He was IO of FIR no.36/20 and 38/20 of PS Gokalpuri.
Dinesh He had arrested accused namely Lokesh Solanki,
Kumar Pankaj, Ankit, Sumit, Prince, Rishabh, Jatin,
Himanshu, Vivek Panchal, Sahil, Sandeep Mogli &
Tinku on different dates. He had recorded their
disclosure statements in both aforesaid FIRs. He had
also prepared their arrest memos in both the FIRs.
PW16 had supplied copy of their disclosure statements
and arrest memos as pertaining to FIR no.36/20, to
IO/Insp. K.C. Sharma of this case, on 03.04.2020 and
19.05.2020. However, these documents were related to
9 accused only as accused Sandeep, Tinku and Sahil,
were arrested subsequently.
PW16 had also provided copy of seizure memo of
mobile phone of accused Jatin, Rishabh and Vivek.
PW16 had also provided copy of seizure memo of
danda recovered at the instance of accused Jatin and
Vivek. PW16 had also provided copy of 12 seizure
memos relating to seizure of mobile phones of 12
members of Kattar Hindu Ekta group.
PW17/SI On 04.04.2020, he along with IO and others visited
Rajneesh Mandoli Jail. He was witnesse to interrogation and
formal arrest of accused Pankaj Sharma, Prince, Ankit
Chaudhary and Sumit Chaudhary on 04.04.2020 at
Mandoli Jail and that of accused Lokesh on 05.04.2020
at Tihar Jail, by IO vide arrest memos Ex. A-39, Ex.
A-40, Ex. A-41, Ex. A-38 & Ex.A-42, respectively.
PW17 also witnessed interrogation and formal arrest of
Page 17 of 36 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CNR No. DLNE01-002728-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 137/2020, FIR No. 103/2020, PS Gokalpuri
Sl. No. & Role of Witness & Description of Proved
Name of Testimony documents/
Witness case properties
accused Jatin, Himanshu, Vivek and Rishabh, by IO on
20.04.2020 at Tihar Jail, vide arrest memos Ex.A-34,
Ex.A-35, Ex.A-36 and Ex.A-37, respectively.
PW17 also witnessed seizure of DVD by IO in this
case vide seizure memo Ex.A-32. This DVD was
handed over by one Ankit Shrivastava, private
photographer to IO.
PW18/ He was IO of FIR No.35/20 and 37/20, both PS
RetdInsp. Gokalpuri. He had arrested accused Lokesh Solanki,
Vinay Tyagi Pankaj Sharma, Sumit Chaudhary, Ankit Chaudhary,
Prince, Vivek Panchal, Himanshu Thakur and Rishabh
Chaudhary, in his case and had supplied copies of
arrest documents to IO of this case.
PW19/Insp. He was IO of FIR no.156/20 PS Ex.PW19/A
Vinod Gokalpuri. PW19 had arrested (OSR) (true
Ahlawat accused Himanshu Thakur, in his photocopy of
case on 08.04.2020. arrest memo of
In that FIR, PW19 had recorded Himanshu in
disclosure statement of accused FIR
Himanshu and he had seized a danda No.156/20);
on the basis of this disclosure Ex.PW19/B
statement. He had also provided (OSR) &
copies of aforesaid documents to IO Ex.PW19/A
of this case. (OSR) (true
copy of
disclosure
statement of
Himanshu and
seizure memo
of danda,
respectively)
PW20/Sh. He had visited GTB Hospital along with
Lal PW10/Shahbuddin, where PW10 identified the dead
Mohammad body as of his son Yameen (Amin), on the basis of
Page 18 of 36 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CNR No. DLNE01-002728-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 137/2020, FIR No. 103/2020, PS Gokalpuri
Sl. No. & Role of Witness & Description of Proved
Name of Testimony documents/
Witness case properties
body structure.
PW21 In February 2020, he was residing at B-55/1, gali no.1,
Bhagirathi Vihar, Delhi. In the month of February
Sh.Amit
2020, riots had taken place in this locality. On
Kumar
26.02.2020, PW21 remained inside his home and he
did not see any mob at any place on that day.
PW21 did not support the case of prosecution and he
was declared hostile on the point of identifying
accused persons in a mob at Nala Road, Bhagirathi
Vihar on 26.02.2020 at 9.15 P.M. and for having seen
beating of a muslim boy at that time by this mob.
PW22/Insp. After registration of FIR, investigation of the present
Jagdish case was assigned to him on 03.03.2020. He had
Yadav prepared site plan Ex.PW15/F of the scene of crime in
the presence of PW15/PSI Ashish Garg.
PW22 sent PW15 to RML Hospital to collect the
exhibits and he did the same. PW22 seized them vide
seizure memo Ex.A-20. PW22 also sent these exhibits
to FSL, Rohini through PW15 and PW15 did the same.
On 15.03.2020, PW22 seized blood sample of
Shahbuddin and his wife, which was given by doctor in
one sealed envelope at GTB hospital. PW22 got
deposited afore-said exhibits in FSL, Rohini through
HC Mahesh.
On 30.03.2020, DNA report was received from FSL
and thereafter, dead body of Aamin was handed over to
Shahbuddin on same day by PW22 at Mortuary GTB
hospital.
PW22 deposed on the lines of PW15 in respect of
identification of dead body of deceased.
PW22 also seized the clothes of deceased kept in
sealed wooden box and envelope containing money,
vide seizure memo Ex.A-21. These exhibits were
brought by ASI Suraj Pal from RML hospital and
Page 19 of 36 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CNR No. DLNE01-002728-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 137/2020, FIR No. 103/2020, PS Gokalpuri
Sl. No. & Role of Witness & Description of Proved
Name of Testimony documents/
Witness case properties
handed over to PW22.
PW22 also obtained photographs taken by Crime Team
along with certificate u/s. 65-B of I.E. Act, through
PW15.
On 27.03.2020, PW22 had handed over file of this case
to Crime Branch as further investigation was
transferred to Crime Branch.
PW23/Sh. He was running a private parking from A-1/1, Gali
Shalu Gaur No.1, Bhagirathi Vihar, Delhi. Riots had taken place
his area in the year 2020. On 26.02.2020, he had not
come out of his home at any point of time. A mob had
assembled in his gali in that evening, wherein persons
from both communities were there.
He did not support the case of prosecution and he was
declared hostile on the point of identification of the
accused persons.
PW24/HC On 11.09.2024, on the instruction of Ex.PW24/A
Manoj Insp. Veer Singh, PW24 took a letter (Seizure
of request to CERT-In at ITO, to memo
collect the mirror copies of the data prepared by
as retrieved from the mobile phones Insp. Veer
in FIR no.35/20. On that day, PW24 Singh in the
handed over that request letter to presence of
PW12/Sh. Arun Kumar Sahani, who PW24)
handed over the pendrive for the
purpose of court and another for the
purpose of IO. PW24 handed over all
these materials to Insp. Veer Singh,
who seized them, vide memo.
PW25/Insp. He was posted in Crime branch and in July 2023, he
Veer Singh took up further investigation in this case. He deposed
on the lines of PW24 in respect of Ex.PW24/A.
PW26 prepared a supplementary chargesheet and filed
these reports alongwith supplementary chargesheet
Page 20 of 36 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CNR No. DLNE01-002728-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 137/2020, FIR No. 103/2020, PS Gokalpuri
Sl. No. & Role of Witness & Description of Proved
Name of Testimony documents/
Witness case properties
before the court on 12.09.2024.
PW26/ACP On 03.04.2020 he was assigned further investigation of Kailash this case. Chander PW26 deposed on the lines of PW16/Insp. Dinesh in Sharma respect of collecting documents pertaining to FIR
No.36/20. PW26 also deposed on the lines of PW17/SI
Rajneesh in respect of collecting Ex. A-39, Ex. A-40,
Ex. A-41, Ex. A-38 and Ex.A-42.
On 08.04.2020, PW15/Ashish Garg handed over
postmortem report of deceased Aamin/Yamin to PW26.
On 13.04.2020, PW26 sent a letter to Director, FSL,
Rohini for site inspection. PW22 also deposed on the
lines of PW14 in respect of Ex.PW14/A. PW22 also
deposed on the lines of PW15, PW22 and PW26 in
respect of inspection and photography of scene of
crime.
On 07.05.2020 Ankit Srivastav handed over video of
postmortem examination of deceased, to PW26, which
was seized vide memo Ex. A-32. On 19.05.2020,
PW26 with PW17 & others, visited crime branch office
at Shakarpur. PW16 had seized mobiles phones in FIR
36/20 and PW26 obtained copies of seizure memos of
12 mobile phones, seizure memo of mobile phone of
accused Jatin Sharma, Vivek Panchal and Rishabh
Chaudhary from PW16/IO of FIR 36/20. PW16 had
also seized a danda at the instance of accused Jatin and
Vivek, and PW26 obtained copy of that memo also.
PW 16 had got retrieved the chats of WhatsApp group
namely Kattar Hindut Ekta Group, and PW26 obtained
copy of that chat from PW16.
PW22 deposed on the lines of PW18 regarding
collecting copies of disclosure of accused Himanshu,
seizure of mobile phone and danda. PW22 also
deposed on the lines of PW17 in respect of Ex.A-34,
Page 21 of 36 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CNR No. DLNE01-002728-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 137/2020, FIR No. 103/2020, PS Gokalpuri
Sl. No. & Role of Witness & Description of Proved
Name of Testimony documents/
Witness case properties
Ex.A-35, Ex.A-36 and Ex.A-37.
On 29.05.2020, PW26 recorded statement of Aslam,
Jallauddin @ Nizamuddin & Nisar Ahmed. On
08.06.2020, PW26 received report from FSL in respect
of inspection of place of incident.
On 09.06.2020, he obtained death certificate of Amin
and recorded statement of Dimple, Shivam Bhardwaj
and Mohit Sharma. On 22.06.2020, he recorded
supplementary statement of Insp. Jagdish Yadav/PW22
and on 23.06.2020 he recorded statement of SI
Rajneesh/PW17.
On 29.06.2020, PW26 filed first chargesheet. On
24.07.2020, PW26 sent an application to DCP/NE for
complaint u/s 195 Cr.P.C in respect of offence u/s 188
IPC. On 28.07.2020, PW26 sent a request letter to
DCP, Crime Branch, to obtain sanction u/s 196 Cr.P.C
for offence u/s 153(A)/505 IPC. On 12.10.2020, PW26
received complaint u/s. 195 Cr.P.C. From the office of
DCP (N/E). He had also placed copy of order u/s. 144
Cr.P.C. as issued by DCP (N/E) on 24.02.2020, in the
file.
On 13.10.2020, PW26 obtained WhatsApp chat
retrieved from the mobile phone of Shivam Bhardwaj,
Mohit Sharma, accused Lokesh Solanki and Pankaj
Sharma, from Insp. Vinay Tyagi/PW18. PW26 also
received copy of report received by Insp. Dinesh
Kumar/PW16 from CERT-In, in respect of retrieval of
data from mobile phone of accused Jatin, Vivek and
Rishabh. PW26 prepared supplementary chargesheet-I
and filed it in the court on 15.10.2020.
On 10.03.2021, PW26 obtained permission for
interrogation and arrest of accused Sandeep and Tinku
Arora. PW26 interrogated and formally arrested them
vide arrest memos Ex.A-65 and Ex.A-66, respectively.
Page 22 of 36 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CNR No. DLNE01-002728-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 137/2020, FIR No. 103/2020, PS Gokalpuri
Sl. No. & Role of Witness & Description of Proved
Name of Testimony documents/
Witness case properties
Similarly, on 12.03.2021 PW26 interrogated and
formally arrested accused Sahil in Mandoli Jail vide
arrest memo Ex.A-67.
On 01.04.2021, PW26 sent a request letter for
subsequent opinion in respect of danda recovered from
accused Vivek, Jatin (in FIR no.36/20) and Himanshu
(in FIR no.156/20), to Superintendent, RML hospital,
through HC Sudhir. Thereafter HC Sudhir handed over
receipt of this letter to PW26.
PW26 received sanction u/s. 196 Cr.P.C. against
accused Sandeep, Tinku and Sahil on 14.11.2021. He
received complaint u/s. 195 Cr.P.C. on 26.11.2021.
Thereafter he filed supplementary chargesheet-III on
02.12.2021.
On 10.10.2022, he recorded statement of HC Pradeep
and filed that statement before the court.
PW26 correctly identified accused Sumit, Sandeep,
Pankaj, Prince, Sahil and Tinku, before the court.
Admitted documents under Section 294 Cr.P.C/330 BNSS
Sanction u/s 196 as Ex.A-1; complaint u/s 195 Cr.PC as Ex.A-2;
endorsement on rukka as Ex.A-3; FIR as Ex.A-4; certificate u/s 65B
of I.E. Act as Ex.A-5; GD no.8A, 49A, 34A & 73A are exhibited as
Ex.A-6 to Ex.A-9; hue and cry notice as Ex.A-10; W.T. message as
Ex.A-11; request for publication as Ex.A-12; Akashvani of
unidentified dead body as Ex.A-13; details of unidentified dead body
as Ex.A-14; hue and cry notice as Ex.A-15; GD no.18A as Ex.A-16;
finger print expert report as Ex.A-17; certificate u/s 65B of I.E. Act as
Ex.A-18; 8 photographs are exhibited as Ex.A-19/1 to Ex.A-19/8;
seizure memos are exhibited as Ex.A-20, Ex.A-21, Ex.A-22, Ex.A-23;
clinical history of Sabuddin as Ex.A-24; clinical history of Amir Bano
as Ex.A-25; MLCs of Amir Bano and Sabuddin are exhibited as
Ex.A-26 and Ex.A-27; FSL reports are exhibited as Ex.A-28 &
Ex.A-29; request for subsequent medical opinion as Ex.A-30; medical
board opinion as Ex.A-31; seizure memo of DVD as Ex.A-32;
Page 23 of 36 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CNR No. DLNE01-002728-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 137/2020, FIR No. 103/2020, PS Gokalpuri
Sl. No. & Role of Witness & Description of Proved
Name of Testimony documents/
Witness case properties
certificate u/s 65B of I.E.Act as Ex.A-33; arrest memos of Jatin,
Himanshu, Vivek, Rishabh, Sumit, Pankaj Sharma, Prince, Ankit
Chaudhary and Lokesh Solanki are exhibited as Ex.A-34 to Ex.A-42;
notice u/s 91 Cr.PC as Ex.A-43; death certificate as Ex.A-44; PCR
van log book as Ex.A-45; entry in wireless diary as Ex.A-46; PCR
form as Ex.A-47; prohibitory order u/s 144 Cr.PC as Ex.A-48;
forwarding letter as Ex.A-49 and GD no.33A as Ex.A-50; PM report
as Ex.A-51; subsequent medical opinion dated 29.04.2021 as
Ex.A-52; Death Report dated 01.03.2020 from Dr. Vikas Yadav in
respect of MLC No. E/45042 as Ex.A-53; MLC No. E-45042 dated
01.03.2020 prepared by Dr. Vikas Yadav as Ex.A-54; request of ld.
DCP (N/E) for constitution of medical board dated 02.03.2020 as
Ex.A-55; CD pertaining to postmortem report as Ex.A-56; age memo
of Rishabh Chaudhary @ Tapas, Himanshu Thakur and Lokesh
Kumar as Ex.A-57, Ex.A-58 & Ex.A-59, respectively; seizure memo
of documents and photographs as Ex.E-60; PCR forms Ex.A-61,
Ex.A-62, Ex.A-63, Ex.A-64, respectively; arrest memo of accused
Sandeep @ Mogli, Tinku, Sahil @ Babu as Ex.A-65, Ex.A-66 and
Ex.A-67, respectively and sanction order and entries in register no.19
as Ex.A-68 Ex.A-69 (colly. 4 pages).
PLEA OF ACCUSED UNDER SECTION 351 BNSS
16. Accused persons denied all the allegations and pleaded
innocence, taking plea that they were innocent and they were
falsely implicated in this case. They also took plea that witnesses
had deposed falsely against them. They further took plea that
they had nothing to do with the commission of alleged offences.
Accused persons did not opt to lead any evidence in their
defence.
ARGUMENTS OF DEFENCE & PROSECUTION
17. I heard ld. Special PP as well as ld. counsels for accused persons
and I have perused the entire material on the record.
Page 24 of 36 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CNR No. DLNE01-002728-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 137/2020, FIR No. 103/2020, PS Gokalpuri
18. Sh. Shubham Arora, Adv. authorised by Sh. Nishant Kumar
Tyagi, ld. counsel for Jatin Sharma, Lokesh Solanki, Sahil @
Babu, Vivek Panchal and Rishabh Chaudhary, argued that as per
allegations deceasedAmin died on 25.02.2020 at 9.30 P.M.
Prosecution relied upon only one eye witness i.e. PW2/Nisar.
But, PW2 did not see anyone committing this murder. His
statement referred to other and general conditions of riots.
Therefore, even if statement of PW2 is taken at its face value, it
does not prove the incident of this case. Ld. counsel further
argued that careful scrutiny of Whats App chats would show that
the members of the same intended to be alert against any attack.
The message imputed to accused Lokesh might have been posted
to enthuse morale of the members and to prepare themselves for
any attack. It can be treated to have been created for defence of
community and sharing of information for that purpose.
19. Sh. Rakshpal Singh and Sh. Hari Krishan, ld. counsels for
accused Pankaj Sharma, Sumit @ Badshah, Ankit Chaudhary @
Fauji, Prince, Tinku and Sandeep @ Mogli, submitted that
statement of PW2 is full of confusion and improbabilities. PW2
could not have seen Johripur Pulia from his house, as claimed by
him. When PW2 left his house, he had made call to police. But
he did not make any call to police for safety of his sister, though
he showed much concern for his sister. PW2 deliberately gave
evasive answers and showed ignorance about signing his
statement given before the court in the past.
20. Sh. Rajan Sisodia, ld. counsel for Himanshu Thakur argued to
add that there was not a single message in the relied upon Whats
Page 25 of 36 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CNR No. DLNE01-002728-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 137/2020, FIR No. 103/2020, PS Gokalpuri
App group, from Himanshu.
21. Per contra, Sh. Madhukar Pandey, ld. Special PP for State relied
upon the WhatsApp chats retrieved from the mobile phone of
witnesses namely Shivam, Mohit and Dimple to submit that these
chats established involvement of accused Lokesh and his
companion accused persons in this incident.
22. Sh. Madhukar Pandey, ld. Special PP filed written argument on
behalf of prosecution. In his written argument, ld. Special PP
strongly placed reliance upon the testimony of eyewitness i.e.
PW2/Nisar Ahmad, in support of this case. Ld. Special PP further
mentioned in the written argument that PW2 confirmed the
presence of the accused persons in the rioting mob on 25.02.2020
since 7-7.30 AM, till the next day. PW2 further confirmed the
presence of accused persons in the rioting mob, who attacked the
house of Pappu, when PW2 was inside the house of Pappu. PW2
correctly identified the accused persons during his testimony
before the court by correctly taking their names except Rishabh.
Written further mentions that from the testimony of PW2, it is
well established that accused persons were an active part of the
mob indulging in riotous activities on 25.02.2020. It is further
mentioned that extraction of Data PW27/Article-1 also
corroborates the prosecution story. In this extracted data
WhatsApp Chats of group in the name of “Kattar Hindutv Ekta”
were recovered. On 26.02.2020, accused Lokesh Solanki in the
afore-said group, vide message at 11:44 PM also stated that “he
had killed 2 Muslim persons in Bhagirathi Vihar.” As per CAF
i.e. Ex.PW11/D, the number from which the extra-judicialPage 26 of 36 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CNR No. DLNE01-002728-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 137/2020, FIR No. 103/2020, PS Gokalpuriconfession was made, was issued in the name of accused Lokesh,
s/o. Yogender. The testimony of PW2/Nisar Ahmad is sufficient
and reliable. Ld. Special PP placed reliance upon the case of
Mohd. Nasim v. State, 2023 SCC OnLine Del 7073, wherein
Hon’ble High Court of Delhi observed that: –
“12. ….It was observed in Kuna @ Sanjaya Behera v. State of
Odisha, 2017 SCC OnLine SC 1336 that the conviction can be
based on the testimony of single eyewitness if he or she passes the
test of reliability and that is not the number of witnesses but the
quality of evidence that is important. The Supreme Court in Veer
Singh v State of UP, (2014) 2 SCC 455 observed as under: –
Legal system has laid emphasis on value, weight and quality of
evidence rather than on quantity, multiplicity or plurality of
witnesses. It is not the number of witnesses but quality of their
evidence which is important as there is no requirement under the
Law of Evidence that any particular number of witnesses is to be
examined to prove/disprove a fact. Evidence must be weighed and
not counted. It is quality and not quantity which determines the
adequacy of evidence as has been provided Under Section 134 of
the Evidence Act. As a general rule the Court can and may act on
the testimony of a single witness provided he is wholly reliable.”
13. The prosecution does not require number of eyewitnesses to
prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. Even if there is one
eyewitness and his testimony is up to the mark, the conviction can
be based upon the same. The Supreme Court in Namdeo v. State
of Maharashtra, (2007) 14 SCC 150 held as under: –
“In the leading case of Shivaji Sahebrao Bobade v. State of
Maharashtra, (1973) 2 SCC 793, this Court held that even where a
case hangs on the evidence of a single eye witness it may be
enough to sustain the conviction given sterling testimony of a
competent, honest man although as a rule of prudence Courts call
for corroboration. “It is a platitude to say that witnesses have to be
weighed and not counted since quality matters more than quantity
in human affairs…….””
23. Ld. Special PP also placed reliance upon the case of Atmaram &
Page 27 of 36 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CNR No. DLNE01-002728-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 137/2020, FIR No. 103/2020, PS Gokalpuri
Ors. v. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2012 (5) SCC 738, wherein
Hon’ble Supreme Court observed that: –
“13. It is a settled cannon of criminal jurisprudence that every
statement of the witness must be examined in its entirety and the
Court may not rely or reject the entire statement of a witness
merely by reading one sentence from the deposition in isolation
and out of context.”
24. It is further mentioned in the arguments that deposition of a
witness who had been cross examined by the Prosecutor for
resiling away from his statement given to police, was considered
in the case of Jodhraj Singh v. State of Rajasthan, 2007(15) SCC
294, wherein Hon’ble Supreme Court observed that: –
“14. It is trite that only because a witness, for one reason or the
other, has, to some extent, resiled from his earlier statement by
itself may not be sufficient to discard the prosecution case in its
entirety. The Courts even in such a situation are not powerless.
Keeping in view the materials available on record, it is
permissible for a Court of law to rely upon a part of the
testimony of the witness who has been declared hostile.”
25. Ld. Special PP further mentioned that Hon’ble Supreme Court in
the case of Jodhraj Singh (supra) also considered and approved
the dictum laid down by it in the judgment of State of U.P. v.
Ramesh Prasad Misra and Another (1996) 10 SCC 360, wherein
it was held that: –
“7. The question is whether the first respondent was present at
the time of death or was away in the village of DW 1, his
brother-in-law. It is rather most unfortunate that these witnesses,
one of whom was an advocate, having given the statements
about the facts within their special knowledge, under Section
161 recorded during investigation, have resiled from correctness
of the versions in the statements. They have not given any
reason as to why the investigating officer could recordPage 28 of 36 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CNR No. DLNE01-002728-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 137/2020, FIR No. 103/2020, PS Gokalpuristatements contrary to what they had disclosed. It is equally
settled law that the evidence of a hostile witness would not be
totally rejected if spoken in favour of the prosecution or the
accused, but it can be subjected to close scrutiny and that portion
of the evidence which is consistent with the case of the
prosecution or defence may be accepted.”
26. Written argument further mentions that even though PW2/Nisar
Ahmad resiled from his statement given to the IO to some extent,
he supported the case of the Prosecution with respect to the role
attributed to accused persons. The above judgments dictate that
the evidence of a witness has to be read in entirety and merely
because the witness resiled from his statements given to the
police, the testimony of such a witness does not become
unreliable or less trustworthy.
27. Written argument further mentions that in the light of afore-said
circumstances, charges u/s. 147/148/302/201 IPC read with
S.34/149 IPC stand proved against all accused persons. Prayer
has been made for conviction of accused persons under Section
147/148/302/201 read with S.34/149 IPC, in the present case.
APPRECIATION OF FACTS AND EVIDENCE
UNLAWFUL ASSEMBLY & RIOT
28. FIR in this case was registered on the basis of recovery of a dead
body from drain (Bhagirathi Vihar Nala). At the time of
registration of FIR, time and place of incident was not known.
During investigation, it was found to be dead body of Amin. The
record shows that prosecution relied upon PW1/Narottam Singh,
PW2/Nisar Ahmad, PW6/Aman Saxena and PW21/Amit, as the
star witnesses and as witnesses to incidents of riot. However,
none of these witnesses vouched to have seen the incident of
Page 29 of 36 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CNR No. DLNE01-002728-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 137/2020, FIR No. 103/2020, PS Gokalpuri
assault and murder of Amin or any incident taking place on
25.02.2020 at 9.30 P.M. All of these witnesses were declared
hostile by the prosecution. Except for PW1, other witnesses did
not give specific account of any incident of murder of a person. I
also find that except for PW6, other witnesses were not even
relied upon to depose about incident allegedly taken place on
25.02.2020 at 9.30 P.M. It is so reflected from the kind of
suggestions given to these witnesses by ld. prosecutor.
29. PW1 mentioned in his testimony that on 26.02.2020 at about 8-
8.30 P.M., he was sitting on a pipeline situated near a temple. At
that time, he saw a mob chasing two bikers. They were coming
from the side of Bhagirathi Vihar and going towards Johripur
Pulia/Chauraha. After reaching that crossroad (chauraha), the
pillion rider jumped into the drain (nala) and another biker also
left the bike and started running away. The mob overpowered
that biker near a sewage filter plant and gave beatings to him.
That biker was in very bad condition and the mob lifted him and
threw him in the drain. The mob also threw that bike in the drain,
while setting fire in the same. After that, PW1 made call to police
at 100 number twice.
30. PW1 did not depose about having seen any incident on
25.02.2020. Apparently above-mentioned part of testimony of
PW1, does not relate to incident probed in this case. PW2/Nisar
claimed that on 25.02.2020 in the morning at about 7-7.30 A.M.,
he went to house of his sister Amina in gali 12, Bhagirathi Vihar.
Thereafter PW2 proceeded towards Johripur, where he saw a
mob. He identified some persons in that mob. PW2 further
Page 30 of 36 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CNR No. DLNE01-002728-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 137/2020, FIR No. 103/2020, PS Gokalpuri
deposed about attack on his house by a mob on this day at about
10 A.M. He did not say anything in respect of alleged incident of
murder of Amin, nor did he say that he had seen any incident of
murder at any point of time.
31. PW6/Aman Saxena was cited as eye witness to an incident of
murder on Nala Road near C block, Bhagirathi Vihar. However,
PW6 deposed that he did not go out of his home on 25.02.2020 at
any point of time. He denied all suggestions of ld. prosecutor,
suggesting that he had been present at Johripur Pulia in the
evening of 25.02.2020 or that he had seen different incidents of
assault and murder of muslim persons that evening including
incident at 9.30 P.M.
32. PW21/Amit deposed that he remained at his house on 26.02.2020
and he did not see any mob. He was not asked about having seen
any incident on 25.02.2020 at all.
33. Even postmortem examination report/Ex. A-51 mentions opinion
regarding time since death as about 10-12 days. Thus, there is no
definite evidence even to show exact time of death of Amin.
During cross examination of a witness i.e. PW4/Mohit Sharma,
ld. prosecutor referred to eight other cases i.e. FIR nos. 35/20,
36/20, 37/20, 38/20, 103/20, 104/20, 149/20 and 156/20 of same
police station. All these cases have been pending in this court
itself. All these cases relate to murder during riot. All these cases
are based on the recovery of dead bodies from the same drain.
Though place of recovery of bodies had been different from each
other. But, for appreciation of evidence in this case, it is relevant
to note that allegedly several dead bodies were thrown in the
Page 31 of 36 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CNR No. DLNE01-002728-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 137/2020, FIR No. 103/2020, PS Gokalpuri
same drain. These incidents have been mentioned in the
chargesheet as well. Prosecution alleged different time of
incident in each case. But evidence on record does not show as to
which incident related to murder of deceased Amin. I find that
there is no evidence at all to prove that Amin was intercepted at
Nala Road, near C block, Bhagirathi Vihar on 25.02.2020 at 9.30
A.M. None of the IOs had got confirmed the identity of the dead
body of Amin, from any of the cited witnesses of several
incidents of assault. Thus, there was no certainty in the case of
prosecution since beginning, that PW6 had actually seen assault
and murder of Amin.
34. Therefore, though on the basis of description of injuries and
cause of death mentioned in the postmortem report, I am sure
about murder of Amin, but I am not sure about the incident of his
murder. Hence, it also becomes difficult to assume as to at what
particular place and time such incident had taken place. Whether
it was a mob consisting of 5 or more persons (which could be
termed as unlawful assembly), or otherwise. Such questions have
remained unanswered in the evidence of this case.
IDENTIFICATION OF ACCUSED PERSONS
35. Next question is that whether accused persons prosecuted in this
case, were members of the mob which killed Amin. In view of
my observation made herein-above, answer to this question does
not remain matter of much speculation. When the court is not
even sure about the incident wherein Amin was killed, and when
there is no clarity from the evidence as to which mob had killed
Amin, then it is only a formality to say that there is no evidence
Page 32 of 36 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CNR No. DLNE01-002728-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 137/2020, FIR No. 103/2020, PS Gokalpuri
on the record to show that any of the accused was member of the
culprit mob.
36. Ld. Prosecutor heavily relied upon the Whats App chats from a
group, to raise fingers against accused Lokesh Solanki. The
relevant part of that chat is as follows: –
“2/26/20, 9:45 AM – Binni: sare taiyaar rho
2/26/20, 8:29 PM – Binni: Bhai taiyaar rho kaam start hone vala
hai
2/26/20, 8:29 PM – Binni: taiyaar rho sare
2/26/20, 8:30 PM – Binni: puliya se pipeline ki trf aarge hai suer
2/26/20, 8:44 PM – +91 97168 29847: Aane du in mullo ka suar
bna denge
2/26/20, 10:22 PM – +91 70539 44604: Bhaio ye danga q ho raha
h nale par abhi jo hua tha
2/26/20, 10:22 PM – +91 70539 44604: Jhoripur nale par
2/26/20, 10:24 PM – +91 96435 06209: Dikat lag rhi he 6 no me
sab ready rhena
2/26/20, 11:39 PM – +91 75574 97409: Bhai Mai Ganga Vihar se
lokesh Solanki hu agr kisi ko koi problem ho or wha log Kam
pde to bta dena Mai apni Puri Ganga Vihar ki team k sath
aayunga Sara Saman hai humare pass goli bandook sab kuch
2/26/20, 11:40 PM – +91 75574 97409: Bhai Pura support hai
abhi Hindu bhaiyo ko
2/26/20, 11:40 PM – +91 75574 97409: Bilkul bhai Ganga Vihar
gokulpuri jhoripur sb sath hai tumhare
2/26/20, 11:41 PM – +91 97739 29196: 15 k Dane h kya
2/26/20, 11:41 PM – +91 97739 29196: Kisi Bhai k pass
2/26/20, 11:41 PM – +91 95992 45196: Monty Nagar.vcf (file
attached)
2/26/20, 11:41 PM – +91 95992 45196: Bahi ad kro bhai ktr
hindu h
2/26/20, 11:41 PM – +91 95992 45196: Yeh
2/26/20, 11:41 PM – +91 75574 97409: Pistol hai
2/26/20, 11:42 PM – +91 75574 97409: Humare pass
2/26/20, 11:42 PM – +91 97739 29196: Faltu h kya
2/26/20, 11:42 PM – +91 97739 29196: Bhai goli h Kya 315 kiPage 33 of 36 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CNR No. DLNE01-002728-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 137/2020, FIR No. 103/2020, PS Gokalpuri2/26/20, 11:44 PM – +91 75574 97409: Tumhare Bhai ne abhi 9
bje k krib b.vihar m 2 mulla mare hai
2/26/20, 11:44 PM – +91 75574 97409: Or nale m feka hai
2/26/20, 11:44 PM – +91 97168 29847: Bilkul Lokesh bhai
2/26/20, 11:44 PM – +91 75574 97409: Apni team k sath
2/26/20, 11:44 PM – +91 70539 44604: Haa bhai
2/26/20, 11:45 PM – +91 97168 29847: Ha
2/26/20, 11:45 PM – +91 75032 34804: Rajput bhai bhagirath
vihar me bande bhej do
2/26/20, 11:45 PM – +91 75574 97409: Bhai abhi thodi aarhe hai
hum sab raily lekr
2/26/20, 11:45 PM – +91 75574 97409: B.vihar m
2/26/20, 11:45 PM – +91 97739 29196: Koi dikkt na h Bhaiyo
2/26/20, 11:49 PM – +91 75574 97409: Vinay tumhe pta hai na
tumhara Bhai sbse aage rhta hai aise kamo m”
37. It is worth to again refer to eight other cases, as mentioned
herein-above. Prosecution has relied upon same chats in all these
nine cases of murder and almost same set of accused persons
(one additional accused being in one case and two additional
accused being in another case) have been chargesheeted in these
nine cases. Accused in this case, are accused in all these nine
cases. Aforesaid chats purportedly refer to killing of two persons
in the night of 26.02.2020. But, same has been used to support
allegations of murder of nine persons. In the present case
prosecution alleged time of murder at 9.30 P.M. of 25.02.2020.
This scenario itself shows that these chats cannot be related to
incident probed in this case. Moreover, such post may be put in
the group solely with intention of becoming hero in the
estimation of other members of the group, also. It could be a
boast, without truth also. Therefore, the relied upon chats, cannot
be substantive evidence to show that accused Lokesh had
Page 34 of 36 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CNR No. DLNE01-002728-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 137/2020, FIR No. 103/2020, PS Gokalpuri
actually killed two muslim persons. These chats at the most could
be used a corroborative piece of evidence, as a support to the
substantive evidence showing complicity of Lokesh in the
alleged incident. Hence, for want of any substantive evidence,
they cannot be given much attention.
38. Ld. Prosecutor also relied upon testimony of PW2/Nisar. PW2
claimed having seen and identified several persons including
some accused persons, in the mob present near Bhagirathi Nala
or Johripur Pulia at different points of time than the alleged time
of incident in this case. In that situation, any name being
mentioned by PW2, becomes worthless. No presumption can be
raised that some persons identified as part of some mob at some
place, would also have been involved in the unknown incident of
murder of Amin, when there is no evidence even to point out the
place and time of such incident.
39. In his cross examination by prosecutor, PW2/Nisar deposed that
he had subsequently come to know from police that murders had
taken place at Johripur Pulia. This again goes on to show that he
had not seen any incident of murder himself.
40. PW2/Nisar admitted suggestion of the prosecutor that he had told
name of some persons to police, who were part of the mob seen
by him and who continued rioting for whole day of 25.02.2020
and they used to kill muslim persons. First of all, such admission
of suggestion does not become evidence of the stated facts,
because what was told by PW2/Nisar before police, does not
become substantive evidence. What was deposed by him before
the court, is the substantive evidence. Secondly, even this
Page 35 of 36 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
CNR No. DLNE01-002728-2020
State v. Lokesh Solanki etc.
SC No. 137/2020, FIR No. 103/2020, PS Gokalpuri
statement does not show if PW2/Nisar had seen any particular
incident of murder. This was a generalized statement, perhaps
based on hearsay, which does not help in the trial of a particular
incident. Therefore, even without going into question of
credibility of statement of PW2/Nisar, I find that his evidence
does not help the case of prosecution in any manner, to prove the
alleged incident in this case.
CONCLUSION & DECISION
41. In view of my foregoing discussions, observations and findings, I
find that charges levelled against the accused persons in this case
are not proved at all. Hence, all accused namely 1. Lokesh
Kumar Solanki, 2. Pankaj Sharma, 3. Ankit Chaudhary, 4. Prince,
5. Jatin Sharma @ Rohit, 6. Himanshu Thakur, 7. Vivek Panchal
@ Nandu, 8. Rishabh Chaudhary @ Tapas, 9. Sumit Chaudhary
@ Badshah, 10. Tinku Arora, 11. Sandeep @ Mogli and 12. Sahil
@ Babu, are acquitted of all the charges.
Digitally signed
by PULASTYA
PULASTYA PRAMACHALA
PRAMACHALA Date: 2025.03.28
10:53:14 +0530
Announced in the open court (PULASTYA PRAMACHALA)
today on 28.03.2025 ASJ-03 (North- East)
(This order contains 36 pages) Karkardooma Courts/Delhi
Page 36 of 36 (Pulastya Pramachala)
ASJ-03, North-East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi