Delhi court acquits man accused of trying to shoot cop in 2018

New Delhi, Jan 26 (PTI) A Delhi court has acquitted a man accused of attempting to shoot a police officer with a licensed pistol during a late-night checking drive in Dwarka in 2018, holding that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt.

Additional Sessions Judge Vandana Jain acquitted Pradeep Kumar of charges under sections 186 (obstructing public servant in discharge of public functions), 353 (assault or criminal force to deter public servant), 324 (voluntarily causing hurt by dangerous weapons or means) and 307 (attempt to murder) of the IPC, section 27 (illegal use of arms and ammunition) of the Arms Act and section 185 (driving when intoxicated) of the Motor Vehicles Act, noting serious gaps in the prosecution's evidence.

The case related to an incident on October 31, 2018, when police officials alleged that Kumar, while drunk, misbehaved with them at a picket near Sector 21 underpass in Dwarka, bit a constable's thumb and later pointed a pistol at an assistant sub-inspector and pulled the trigger, though the weapon did not fire.

"The prosecution is under a legal obligation to prove each and every ingredient of the offence beyond reasonable doubt," the court said in its judgment dated January 15, reiterating the settled principle of criminal jurisprudence.

While the court observed that the testimony of police witnesses cannot be discarded merely because they are police officials, it stressed that their evidence must inspire confidence. "Their testimonies have to be appreciated with care and caution in order to see whether the same can be relied upon to hold the accused guilty," the judge said.

The court noted that none of the police witnesses produced any departure entry or record to show they were officially deputed at the picket on the night of the incident. It also flagged the absence of independent public witnesses despite the prosecution's claim that members of the public had gathered at the spot.

With regards to the injuries sustained by one of the police constables, the court said, "Constable Hari Singh sustained teeth bite but it is matter of record that no saliva test or any other medical test was conducted which could indicate that bite mark as mentioned in the medico-legal case (MLC) of Constable Hari Singh was inflicted by accused Pradeep Kumar or it was a self inflicted bite." The court found fault with the MLC of the accused showing a relatively high blood alcohol content because the prosecution failed to place the actual alcohol test report on record. While the MLC mentioned intoxication, the judge held that, given the overall doubts in the prosecution's case, it was necessary for the investigating officer to substantiate this claim with the alcohol test report, noting that an MLC could be prepared at the behest of police and could not be relied upon in isolation without supporting material.

"In the absence of cogent and convincing evidence, the benefit of doubt must necessarily go to the accused," the court held while acquitting Kumar.

Kumar had denied the allegations and claimed he was falsely implicated after refusing to pay a bribe at the picket. PTI MDB AMJ AMJ