Lagatar24 Desk
New Delhi, Jan 20: A Delhi court on Thursday pronounced the first sentence in the 2020 Delhi Riots proceedings, handing down a five-year sentence to a man named Dinesh Yadav who was convicted guilty of rioting and setting fires.
Additional Sessions Judge Virender Bhatt issued the order, which sentenced Dinesh Yadav to five years in prison.
On December 6, 2021, the Court found Yadav guilty of violating the Indian Penal Code’s Sections 143 (unlawful assembly), 147 (rioting), 148 (rioting with a deadly weapon), 457 (house trespass), 392 (robbery), and 436 (mischief by fire or explosive substance with intent to destroy house, etc.) and Section 149 (every member of unlawful assembly guilty of offence committed in prosecution of common object).
According to the Court,
“The fact that the accused also belongs to Hindu community and was present in the mob armed with an wooden rod which mob resorted to violence against the Muslims, indicates that he shared the common object of the unlawful assembly.
The mere fact that he was not seen entering complainant’s house or vandalising or looting or putting it on fire, does not mean that he was mere a bystander. There is nothing on record to show that the accused had disassociated himself from the unlawful assembly and he did not share the common object of the assembly.”
On December 12, 2021, the Court heard Yadav on the quantum of his punishment before issuing its decision today.
A group of 150-200 rioters assembled in front of the complainant’s house at around 11:30 a.m., according to the prosecution, which called 13 witnesses throughout the trial. Her house was broken into by a mob, who committed robbery and set fire to some of her belongings. In order to save their lives, the complainant and her children were said to have leaped to the terrace of the nearby house.
Yadav’s name came up in the complainant’s and police officers’ statements for being involved in fire, looting, and robbery at the complainant’s home. On June 3, 2020, it was revealed that he had been detained in another case.
He disputed all of the claims and said he was being set up. In addition, he decided not to present any evidence in his defence.
