Pranav B Prem

A Delhi court has directed action against police officials for filing a false report and for supervisory lapses in a case involving allegations of a bullet being fired outside a complainant’s residence. Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Tushar Gupta of Karkardooma Courts refused bail to the accused, Mustakeem, but issued a notice to the Joint Commissioner of Police to take disciplinary action against the investigating officer (IO) and to initiate proceedings against the SHO and ACP for supervisory failure.

Also Read: Criminal Lawyer Shri Singh Appointed as Special Public Prosecutor for NIA in Pahalgam Terror Attack Case

The case stems from an incident near a burial ground, where a fight allegedly broke out between the complainant and the accused’s family during the burial of Mustakeem’s mother. The defence contended that 6–7 armed assailants attacked Mustakeem and his family, and though his father lodged a written complaint, the police allegedly registered a false FIR implicating the accused instead.

According to the prosecution, the accused fired a bullet outside the complainant’s house and was seen in CCTV footage running with a desi katta (country-made pistol). Mustakeem, however, maintained that the weapon was planted at the police station and that he had voluntarily gone there before being arrested. The court noted a serious inconsistency in the IO’s report — while the officer claimed the accused was arrested on information from a secret informer, CCTV footage from the police station clearly showed that Mustakeem had walked in himself. The same was also confirmed by the police official present in the footage.

The magistrate observed: “It can very well be said that the IO has filed a false report in this matter to mislead the court. Further, from the photographs placed on record, it can be seen that the father of the accused has received grievous injuries on his head, alleged to have been caused by the complainant.” The court also highlighted that although the father of the accused suffered serious injuries, appropriate penal provisions were not added to the FIR filed on his complaint, whereas Mustakeem was arrested immediately. The magistrate found discrepancies between the original complaint and the FIR text, indicating alteration of facts to benefit the complainant. “The IO is not investigating the case properly. Action must also be taken on the SHO and ACP concerned for supervisory lapse on their part,” the court ordered.

Also Read: Rajasthan High Court Grants Six-Month Temporary Bail to Asaram Bapu on Medical Grounds

Despite these findings, the bail plea was dismissed. The court remarked that had the IO not produced the CCTV footage showing the accused running with the weapon, bail could have been considered.“Firing a bullet shot outside a house is a serious offence. The fact is yet to be established and proved, but the gravity and seriousness of the act cannot be ignored,” the court held, adding that another individual seen with a weapon remains unapprehended. The court directed the filing of a compliance report on November 3, 2025, and emphasized that the observations made were not to be construed as comments on the merits of the case.

Appearance

Sh. Kamal Kapoor, Ld. APP for the State.

Sh. Javed Khan, Ld. Counsel for the applicant/accused, SI Rajiv in person

Cause Title: State Vs. Mustakeem

Case No: Bail Matters / 403/2025

Coram: Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Tushar Gupta