New Delhi: Holding that personal liberty cannot be eclipsed by the gravity of allegations alone, a Delhi court on Tuesday granted bail to all 12 accused in Turkman Gate stone-pelting case, observing that “bail cannot be refused merely because the offence alleged carries a severe punishment” — particularly when the prosecution failed to prima facie establish specific individual roles.Taking note of their ages, clean antecedents, period of incarceration and the non-requirement of further custody, Judge Bhupinder Singh released Mohd. Kaif, Kashif, Ubaidullah, Imran, Adnan, Sameer Hussain, Naved, Athar, Areeb, Aadil, Amir Hamza and Adnan on bonds of Rs 50,000 each.Addressing the charge of attempt to murder under BNS, the court observed that while the provision carries serious consequences, the medical material placed on record didn’t indicate any grievous injuries to police personnel, thus weakening their claim of threat to life. “Pre-trial detention is not meant to serve as punishment,” the judge concluded, reiterating that the seriousness of the accusation alone cannot justify incarceration.Though the prosecution cited drone surveillance and video recordings from what it described as a “pre-planned and sensitive demolition drive.” The court, however, noted the absence of any “specific footage was played before this court… to prima facie demonstrate clear and unmistakable identification” of any accused actively participating in stone pelting. Additionally, the allegations of “damage to public property” were also neither quantified nor individually attributed, the court observed.Judge Singh also observed that where police personnel are the alleged victims, “transparency and fairness must assume greater importance”, and the investigating agency must place clear material on record to rule out “even an iota of perceived bias.”The defence, led by advocates including Asad Mirza, Supantha Sinha and Salman Bukhsh, had argued that the footage cited by the prosecution was largely unclear — a concern the court also agreed with. The judge recommended the use of body-worn cameras and proper CCTV during such operations, especially where “resistance is foreseeable” to ensure accountability and accurate identification.Eventually, finding the evidence largely documentary and electronic in nature, and witnesses mostly official, the court rejected the plea for continued custody. It also invoked parity with co-accused Mohammad Ubedullah, granted bail on Jan 24, noting no distinguishing feature in the present applicants’ roles.
