NEW DELHI: A court here has acquitted a man accused of rioting and arson during the 2020 Delhi riots, citing serious inconsistencies in the prosecution’s case and ruling that it would be unsafe to rely on the testimony of the lone identifying witness.
Additional Sessions Judge Parveen Singh was hearing the case against accused Faizan alias Aryan, who was accused of setting fire to Arun Modern Public Senior Secondary School located on the Brijpuri road during the 2020 Delhi riots and granted him the benefit of doubt.
In an order dated January 28, the court said, “Considering these facts and circumstances, I find that it will be highly unsafe to rely upon the sole testimony of the prosecution witness (PW2 Constable Piyush). I accordingly find that the prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond all reasonable doubts and the accused is entitled to the benefit of doubt”.
Faizan was accused of being part of a riotous mob that allegedly vandalised and set the school ablaze on February 25, 2020, causing damage estimated at more than Rs 1 crore. The prosecution had claimed that around 200 people forcibly entered the premises, destroyed property and vehicles, and set the building on fire.
Three people, including Faizan, were initially arrested in the case. Two of his co-accused were acquitted in February 2025. Faizan, who was declared a proclaimed offender in 2022 after absconding, was arrested in August 2025 and faced trial separately.
The court noted that the case against Faizan rested entirely on the testimony of a single police witness, who had allegedly identified him as part of the rioting mob. “It is also to be noticed that this witness has taken contradictory stands in his two testimonies, which were recorded before the court,” the judge said.
The court also noted an unexplained delay in registration of the FIR and the failure of the investigating agency to examine other police personnel who were allegedly present at the spot. “No explanation has been provided for these contradictions,” the court said, adding that the prosecution had failed to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt. Accordingly, the court acquitted the accused of all charges.
