07 Mar 2025 | Saket, New Delhi : The Additional Sessions Judge, Vishal Singh, at Saket Courts, New Delhi, has discharged Mohd. Umar and Muddussir Faheem Hasmee in FIR No. 242/2019 related to the Delhi riots, citing insufficient evidence.
On 15 December 2019, a large group of protestors, including students from Jamia Millia Islamia, gathered near Surya Hotel in New Delhi to peacefully demonstrate against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA). However, the situation escalated when alleged clashes broke out between the protestors and law enforcement. The protestors were accused of damaging public and private property, torching vehicles, and injuring police officials, though many claim these actions were provoked or carried out by infiltrators. The violence spread to other areas where alleged use of stones, sticks, and petrol bombs was reported. While the police responded with tear gas and force, many protestors maintain that they were wrongfully targeted. The court later noted that the events were part of a larger alleged conspiracy, though protestors argue they were unfairly criminalized for exercising their democratic right to dissent.
The court discharged Mohd. Adil, Roohul Ameen, Mohd. Jamal, Mohd. Umar, Mohd. Shahil, Muddussir Faheem Hasmee, Mohd. Imran Ahmad, Saqib Khan, Tanjil Ahmad Chaudhary, Mohd. Imran, Muneeb Mian, Saif Siddique, Shahnawaz, and Mohd. Yusuf due to lack of credible evidence. They had been charged under Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 186, 353, 332, 333, 307, 308, 427, 435, 323, 124A, 153A, 341, 120B IPC, Sections 3/4 PDPP Act, and Sections 25/27 Arms Act.
The Association for Protection of Civil Rights (APCR) played a crucial role in providing legal support and representation for two of the accused. APCR’s legal team actively challenged the prosecution’s claims, arguing that mere suspicion, without substantial proof, cannot be the basis for criminal charges. Their efforts were instrumental in securing the discharge of Mohd. Umar and Muddussir Faheem Hasmee. Advocates representing the accused argued that the prosecution had failed to provide independent evidence beyond mobile location data. The defense submitted that no direct evidence, witness testimonies or video footage, for example, linked Mohd. Umar and Muddussir Faheem Hasmee to the alleged unlawful assembly or violence.
No witness saw either of them at the scene of the alleged crime. No visual evidence from CCTV cameras or other sources confirmed their presence at the location during the riots. Their inclusion in the case was based solely on mobile phone location data, which the court ruled as insufficient to establish their physical presence at the crime scene. In its 07 March 2025 order, the court absolved Mohd. Umar and Muddussir Faheem Hasmee of their alleged crimes. The order emphasized that mobile location data alone is not a conclusive indicator of a person’s involvement in a criminal act and cannot be the sole basis for prosecution without corroborating evidence.
Case Title: State vs. Anal Hussain & Ors.
Case Number: SC No. 116/2020
FIR No. 242/2019
Court: Saket Court, New DelhiCounsels for Petitioners: – Deeksha Dwivedi, Advocate