The court emphasized that at the charge framing stage, the prosecution's material must be accepted at face value to determine if a prima facie case exists against the accused.

JUDGMENT

1. This revision petition under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (“Cr.P.C.”) assails the order on charge (“impugned order”) dated 24^th July 2023, passed by Additional Sessions Judge-03 (“ASJ”) North East, Karkardooma Courts in SC No. 121/2021, titled ‘State v. Rafat and Ors’ arising out of FIR No.136/2020, registered at Police Station (‘P.S’ Dayalpur. By this order, charges were framed against petitioner under Section 147 , 148 , 427 , 435 , 436 , 450 read with Section 149 and 188 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (“ IPC ”)

2. The gravamen of petitioner’s challenge is that the charges framed against petitioner are based on inadmissible disclosures, delayed and unreliable witness statements, and lack of cogent evidence linking him to the alleged offences of arson and vandalism at Fair Deal Cars Pvt. Ltd. (“the showroom”). Petitioner contends that the material on record does not establish any overt act or common object shared with the unlawful assembly.

Factual Background

3. As per the case of prosecution on 24^th February 2020, a PCR call was received regarding incidents of rioting and arson at the showroom, located on Main Wazirabad Road, opposite Petrol Pump, Bhajanpura, Delhi. Subsequently, Sub-Inspector (“SI”) Shiv Charan reached the site and found the showroom damaged and set on fire by a mob.

4. On 28th February 2020, the General Manager of the showroom Mr. Rajesh Singh, filed a written complaint stating that the showroom had been closed on 24th February 2020 due to riots in the area. He further stated that on 25th February 2020, around 6:00 PM, he received a phone call informing him about the arson. Based on this complaint, coupled with crime scene inspection and other information, an FIR was registered on 5th March 2020 at P.S Dayalpur under Sections 147 , 148 , 149 , 427 , 436 , and 437 of IPC .

5. A separate complaint dated 27th February 2020 was filed by Mr. Vikas, an employee of the showroom, alleging that mob had set his motorcycle on fire. Prosecution claims that during the investigation, efforts were made to identify the petitioner through CCTV footage, social media videos, and public testimonies, and the public was requested to provide any relevant material.

6. The first charge sheet was filed on 4th May 2020 before the Duty Magistrate, Karkardooma Courts, for offences under Sections 147 , 148 , 149 , 427 , 435 , 436 , and 120B IPC , against four individuals (excluding the petitioner). The Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (‘CMM’) took cognizance on 18th December 2020 and committed the case to the Court of Sessions on 29th January 2021.

7. Petitioner was arrested on 30th October 2020 at Mandoli Jail, Delhi, more than eight months after the alleged incident. He was later granted bail on 25th November 2020, with ASJ observing that petitioner was neither named in the FIR nor specifically implicated in any overt act related to the incident.

8. On 26th March 2021, first supplementary charge sheet, naming 36 accused persons, including the petitioner, was filed. Petitioner was later granted bail in another related FIR.

9. The second supplementary chargesheet, filed on 7th May 2022, included allegations against six additional accused and added Sections 188 IPC and 34 IPC . A complaint under Section 195 Cr.P.C. was also filed. The case was committed to the Court of Sessions by the Ld. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (CMM) on 5th July 2022.

10. On 5th August 2023, the Investigating Agency filed a third supplementary chargesheet against fi