Six sentenced up to three years for rioting and arson in 2020 Delhi violence

The Northeast Delhi riots of February 2020 were one of the most violent communal clashes witnessed in the national capital in decades. Triggered by tensions over the Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA) and the proposed National Register of Citizens (NRC), the violence erupted after confrontations between pro- and anti-CAA groups in areas such as Jaffrabad, Maujpur, Chand Bagh, Shiv Vihar, and Khajuri Khas.

The unrest, which lasted several days, left 53 people dead, hundreds injured, and homes, shops, and religious places destroyed. Numerous cases of arson, looting, and assault were reported, leading to widespread investigations by the Delhi Police and the formation of Special Investigation Teams (SITs) to probe the incidents.

Five years later, a Delhi court has now pronounced a key judgment in one of the riot-related cases. The Karkardooma Court on Tuesday sentenced six individuals to imprisonment ranging from six months to three years for their involvement in rioting, arson, and disobedience of public orders during the 2020 violence. Each convict was also fined ₹61,000.

The case, registered at Khajuri Khas Police Station, pertained to the looting and burning of articles from shopkeeper Vakeel Ahmed’s store in the Sadatpur area during the riots.

Additional Sessions Judge Parveen Singh convicted Hari Om Gupta, Gorakh Nath, Bhim Sain, Kapil Pandey, Rohit Gautam, and Basant Kumar under Sections 147 (rioting), 148 (rioting armed with a deadly weapon), 435 (mischief by fire), 450 (house-trespass to commit an offence), and 188 (disobedience to order of a public servant) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

While delivering the sentence, the judge observed that the convicts had no prior criminal record and had not been involved in any offences after 2020, suggesting they could be reformed. However, the court rejected their plea for leniency, noting that punishment “should not be so mild that it erodes the deterrent effect” in cases of collective violence.

During the trial, eyewitnesses, including Head Constable Sandeep, identified the accused from video footage as those who vandalised and burnt Ahmed’s shop. The court held them guilty of mischief by fire under Section 435 IPC but did not apply Section 436, citing lack of evidence to prove intent to destroy the entire building.

Legal experts view the verdict as a significant step toward accountability in riot-related cases, reinforcing that mob violence will not go unpunished, even years later. The court’s balanced approach recognising both deterrence and reform is seen as a constructive precedent that could strengthen public confidence in India’s judiciary and guide future riot trials.