Did the Delhi HC Deny Bail to Ex-AAP Councillor in Ankit Sharma Murder Case?
Click to start listening
Synopsis
The Delhi High Court's decision to deny bail to ex-AAP councillor Tahir Hussain raises significant questions about justice in the Ankit Sharma murder case. As the trial unfolds, the implications of this ruling extend beyond the courtroom, reflecting a critical moment in the discourse on accountability during communal violence.
Key Takeaways
- Delhi HC rejects bail for Tahir Hussain
- Charges include murder and rioting
- Case linked to 2020 North-East Delhi riots
- Implications for communal violence accountability
- Trial proceedings are under scrutiny
New Delhi, Sep 25 (NationPress) The Delhi High Court has rejected a bail petition submitted by former Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) councillor Tahir Hussain, who is embroiled in the murder case of Intelligence Bureau officer Ankit Sharma linked to the 2020 North-East Delhi riots.
A single-judge Bench presided by Justice Neena Bansal Krishna turned down Hussain's plea. In December of the previous year, a Bench led by Justice Anoop Kumar Mendiratta had requested a response from the Delhi Police regarding Hussain's challenge to the trial court's prior denial of his bail request.
In March 2023, a Delhi court formally charged Tahir Hussain with murder in relation to this case.
Additional Sessions Judge Pulastya Pramachala at the Karkardooma Courts held that Hussain and ten others were to face trial for various offences, including Sections 147 (Rioting), 148 (Rioting, armed with a deadly weapon), 153A (Promoting enmity between groups based on religion or race), and 302 (Murder) in conjunction with 120B (Criminal Conspiracy) under the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
Hussain also faces charges under Sections 505, 109, and 114 of the IPC. The trial court indicated that Hussain incited a mob to murder Hindus, urging them to "not spare them".
On February 26, 2020, an FIR was filed by Sharma's father, Ravinder Kumar, who alleged that protests related to the anti-CAA and pro-CAA took place for several days at Chand Bagh Pulia on Main Karawal Nagar Road.
He reported, "On February 25, 2020, my son left to purchase household items but did not return for an extended period."
Locals later informed Kumar that a boy had been thrown into the Khajuri Khas nala from the Chand Bagh Masjid.
Eventually, Sharma's body was retrieved from the drain, with Kumar alleging that Hussain and his associates were responsible for the murder.
Hussain is seeking bail based on the precedent set by co-accused Shoaib Alam, Gulfam, and Javed, who were previously granted bail due to delays in the trial's commencement.
Point of View
The focus remains on the principles of justice and accountability. The Delhi HC's denial of bail to Tahir Hussain highlights the judiciary's role in addressing serious allegations during communal riots. It is crucial to ensure that the rule of law prevails while maintaining the integrity of the judicial process.
NationPress
25/09/2025
Frequently Asked Questions
What charges is Tahir Hussain facing?
Tahir Hussain faces multiple charges including murder, rioting, and inciting violence under various sections of the Indian Penal Code.
What was the basis for the bail denial?
The bail plea was denied based on the seriousness of the charges and the implications of inciting communal violence.
Who filed the FIR in the Ankit Sharma case?
The FIR was filed by Ankit Sharma's father, Ravinder Kumar, alleging his son's murder amid the riots.
What was the court's stance on the trial's progression?
The court has expressed concern over the delays in trial proceedings, which were cited by other accused in their bail pleas.
What impact does this case have on communal violence discourse?
The case emphasizes the importance of accountability and justice in the aftermath of communal riots, influencing public perception and future legal standards.
