A former student of Jamia Milia Islamia, who was facing trial for over a decade for allegedly beating a college mate in the university campus, has been acquitted by a Delhi court which held that the statements of the complainant were "unreliable".
Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Pritam Singh, acquitted Shadab Ahmad of the charge of voluntarily causing hurt and wrongfully restraining another student Giri Raj Singh in 2001 after which he was rusticated from the university.
"I have found several contradictions in the deposition of complainant (Singh) which raise doubts in the story of prosecution case.
"It is well settled law that the benefit of doubt always goes in favour of accused. Hence, accused Shadab Ahmad is acquitted of charges of offences under sections 341 (wrongful restraint) and 323 (voluntarily causing hurt) of the IPC," the magistrate said.
The court noted that Singh had lodged the FIR against Ahmad over a month after the incident and he could not explain the reason for the delay.
"The case was registered on May 4, 2001 which is more than one month after the incident which took place on March 27, 2001. The question arises, if the complainant was beaten by the accused and his accomplices, then, why did he not lodge a complaint on the same day or on the next day?
"The prosecution failed to explain the delay in lodging the FIR particularly when the complainant is an educated person," it said.
As per the prosecution, Singh had told the police that on the afternoon of March 27, 2001, he was on his way to the canteen from the Faculty of Arts building in the university campus when Ahmad took him near a toilet and beat him up with the help of his friends.
Singh, who sustained serious injury in his left eye, was taken to a nearby hospital while Ahmad and his accomplices fled from the spot, it said.
He had told the police that after consulting his Head of the Department at the university, a complaint was lodged against Ahmad, who was later rusticated.
While acquitting Ahmad, the court said that Singh, in his complaint, had not given to the police description of the boys who had beaten him up and Ahmad was arrested in his absence.
"It is important to mention here that the complainant didn't even describe the accused to police in his complaint and the accused was also not arrested in the presence of the complainant, then, how was Shadab Ahmad apprehended by the police and on what basis?" the court asked.
Ahmad had denied the allegations and said that he was falsely implicated in the case.
