Nuh Violence Case: Mamman Khan Named Accused and His Plea Before SC
Introduction
- On July 31, 2023, large-scale communal riots erupted in Haryana's Nuh district, culminating in the killing of a few individuals, injuries, and loss of property. FIRs No. 149 and 150 were registered at the Nagina Police Station on August 1, 2023. The Haryana Police named Congress MLA Mamman Khan as an accused in the Nuh violence case, which erupted on July 31 after two groups clashed over a religious procession.
- The violence in Nuh had left a few people dead and several others injured. It had also led to arson and looting. The police had arrested over 165 people in connection with the case, including several members of the Muslim community.
- Khan's naming as an accused has come as a significant blow to the Congress party. The party has been alleging that the BJP-JJP government in Haryana is targeting its leaders and workers.
- On August 28 2024 and September 2 2024, the Additional Sessions Judge, Nuh, ordered the Station House Officer, Police Station Nagina, to present a separate chargesheet against MLA Mamman Khan and consequently, segregated his trial from that of the co-accused. The trial court noted that the frequent absences of some accused persons and their numerous absences had contributed to the delay.
- The trial court rationalized this order by noting that the accused, Mamman Khan, was a sitting MLA; therefore, his trial had to be held on a day-to-day basis in accordance with the Supreme Court's instructions in the matter of Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay.
- Aggrieved by the segregation of his trial, the appellant Mamman Khan challenged the segregation orders by filing CRM-M Nos—61515 and 61516 of 2024 before the High Court for quashing the order of the trial court. On December 12, 2024, the High Court dismissed both petitions, thereby upholding the trial court's order of segregation. The appellant filed appeals before the Supreme Court.
Submission Before the Supreme Court
- The counsel for the appellant, Khan, submitted that the segregation of the trial was arbitrary and unlawful, as Section 223 of the CrPC requires joint trials for the same offense committed in the course of the same transaction.
- Claimed that the investigation showed the appellant was not present at the scene and no material evidence linked him to the offence.
- Counsel also argued that the dependency upon Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay was incorrect because that judgment merely called for prioritization of cases regarding MPs and MLAs, but did not empower separate charge sheets or trials upon political status.
- The State contended that segregation due to the large number of accused and frequent delays caused by the non-appearance of some co-accused. It was further argued that under Section 218 Cr.P.C., the general rule is that each offence shall be tried separately. While Section 223 enables joint trials, it is directory.
- The State also contended that the appellant failed to demonstrate any actual prejudice suffered as a result of the separate trial.
Court's Order
- The Supreme Court noted that the sole ground cited by the trial court was the appellant's political position and the delay caused by other accused parties. The evidence against the appellant is identical to that against the co-accused. Separate trials would necessarily involve recalling the same witnesses, resulting in duplication, delay, and the risk of inconsistent findings.
- The appellant's status as a sitting MLA cannot, by itself, justify a separate trial. All accused stand equal before the law, and preferential segregation militates against the equality principle enshrined in Article 14. The Court quashed the orders of segregation and ordered a joint trial to be held.
Background of the Nuh Violence
- The violence in Nuh erupted on July 31 after two groups clashed over a religious procession. Members of the Hindu community participated in a procession on the occasion of Eid al-Adha.
- According to the police, the violence broke out after members of the Muslim community objected to the procession passing through their area. The two groups clashed, and stones and petrol bombs were thrown.
- A few people were killed in the violence, and several others were injured. It also led to arson and looting. The police had arrested over 165 people in connection with the case, including several members of the Muslim community.
Mamman Khan's Role & Congress's Statement
- The Haryana Police alleged that Mamman Khan incited the violence and led a mob that attacked the religious procession. The police also alleged that Khan was present at the scene of the violence.
- Khan has denied the allegations, calling them "politically motivated." He has said that he was not present at the scene of the violence and that he has nothing to do with it.
- Congress spokesperson Randeep Singh Surjewala said that the allegations against Khan were "baseless" and that they were a "desperate attempt" by the BJP-JJP government to "silence" its critics.
Conclusion
Mamman Khan had filed a petition in the High Court seeking an SIT probe into the Nuh violence. Khan had alleged that the Haryana Police is investigating the case in a "biased" manner and that it is trying to frame him. The High Court had issued a notice to the state government in response to Khan's petition and has sought its response. However, the naming of Mamman Khan as an accused in the Nuh violence case was a significant development in the case. It will be interesting to see how the case unfolds and whether Khan is convicted of the charges against him. The outcome of the case will also have implications for the Congress party, which has been alleging that the BJP-JJP government in Haryana is targeting its leaders and workers. For legal assistance, contact us.
