The court said that there is no doubt that the assembly in present case was unlawful as it has caused traffic jam and indulged in violence.
New Delhi: A Delhi court has convicted AAP MLA Prakash Jarwal and two others for assaulting police personnel and rioting in 2013.
The court said that there is no doubt that the assembly in the present case was unlawful as it has caused a traffic jam and indulged in violence, which seems to be its common object.
Additional chief metropolitan magistrate Samar Vishal said there was no doubt that the assembly was not peaceful and had not adopted peaceful means of protest.
The court held that Jarwal, Salim and Dharam Prakash were part of the unlawful assembly who assaulted two police constables and an assistant sub-inspector.
"The accused Jarwal, Salim and Prakash are convicted for offence under sections 332 (voluntarily causing hurt to deter public servant from his duty), 353 (assault or criminal force to deter public servant) and 147 (punishment for rioting) read with section 149 IPC (unlawful assembly) and under section 3 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act also read with section 149 IPC," the court said.
The maximum punishment under Section 332 and 352 of the Indian Penal Code is a jail term of three years along with a fine.
Section 3 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act states, "Whoever commits mischief by doing any act in respect of any public property, other than public property of the nature referred to in sub-section (2) shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to five years and with a fine.
According to the complaint, on August 30, 2013, around 100 persons gathered, who caused a traffic jam and were involved in the damaging of vehicles.
The incident of rioting occurred near Vayusenabad at MB Road here in which some of the police personnel, who were controlling the riots, were assaulted and two vehicles were damaged including a DTC bus. The mob which indulged in the rioting also resorted to stone-pelting and violence.
The mob was protesting against the killing of a person and was alleging inaction on the part of police in the investigation of that case.
Jarwal had claimed in the court that he was not present on the spot on the date of the incident and was sitting in his office and attending the problems of people as his ticket in the election was confirmed.
He also said that there is a political conspiracy against him to defame his image in the eyes of the general public as it was his daily routine work.