Former Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) councillor Tahir Hussain and four others were on Friday sentenced to life imprisonment for the murder of Intelligence Bureau (IB) officer Ankit Sharma during the 2020 Delhi riots, with a city court ruling that while the crime was “horrendous” and “sickening”, the prosecution had failed to prove that the convicts were beyond the possibility of reform.
Event Context
Additional sessions judge Parveen Singh of the Karkardooma courts sentenced Hussain, and four others – Kasim, Nazim, Javed and Anas – to imprisonment for life.
Also read: ‘Murderous mob dragged him’: What happened the day IB official was killed in Delhi riots
The court rejected the Delhi Police’s plea for capital punishment. The court observed that although the murder fell within the “rarest of the rare” category on account of its brutality, the prosecution had not established that the convicts’ continued existence in prison “would pose a menace to society”.
Emphasising the severity of the crime, the court held: “The crime was brutal, with a murderous mob baying for blood of the victim… the manner and the utmost brutality with which the victim was killed was done solely on account of religion. He was sucked in by a murderous mob and strapped like an animal… and as if the hatred had still not been satiated, the dead body was thereafter thrown into the nala.”
Describing the killing as being committed in “utter disdain of law” and with complete “disregard for life”, the judge said the barbarity of the murder constituted an aggravating circumstance of the highest order.
Also read: ‘Not too late, HC will ensure justice’: Tahir Hussain on life term in Ankit Sharma murder case
Team Analysis
The court rejected the convicts’ plea that their dependent families should be treated as a mitigating circumstance, holding that the “monstrosity of the crime outweighs that defence”.
To be sure, it held that the prosecution had failed to prove that the convicts were incapable of reformation. The judge noted that none of them had a history indicating a violent disposition or criminal propensity and that, barring minor prison infractions, their conduct in custody had been satisfactory. “This indicates that they can be disciplined and made to follow rule-based order,” the court observed.
ASJ Singh also declined to accept the prosecution’s frontal argument that Hussain had planned and facilitated the violence by allowing his house to be used for stockpiling petrol bombs and weapons.
Also read: ‘Insaaf nahi hua hai’: Tahir Hussain broke down after conviction in IB staffer’s murder case
“No role has been attributed to Tahir Hussain and the allegation that he facilitated and instigated the mob and used his house as a base for petrol bombs has to be rejected as no evidence has been brought on record,” the judge said. “I find myself unable to believe that their continued existence even in prison would be a menace to society,” the court held.
In case of the four other convicts, the court treated their lack of education as a mitigating factor. While observing that illiteracy should not ordinarily reduce punishment, the judge held that they had become “susceptible to misinformation” and “communal frenzy” during the riots.
“The offence was committed when vested interests… whipped up a religious crime. The convicts, being uneducated, were more gullible and susceptible to such propaganda,” the court said, adding that persons with little or no education are generally less equipped to critically evaluate misinformation.
Last week, Delhi Police had sought the death penalty, describing the killing as “exceptionally brutal”, “cold-blooded” and among the “rarest of the rare” category. “Ankit Sharma was assaulted in a hapless manner… It is not a case where somebody was stabbed once or thrice,” special public prosecutor Madhukar Pandey argued.
A Delhi court on July 13 convicted Hussain and four others for Sharma’s murder, holding that Hussain, along with an “armed” mob, had carried out a “savage” and “relentless” attack.
Hussain, represented by advocate Rajiv Mohan, opposed the plea, arguing that there was no evidence of a criminal conspiracy or direct attribution of fatal injuries to him.
The five were convicted on July 13 for Sharma’s murder, while six others were acquitted.
