The Delhi court came to the conclusion based on circumstantial evidence and also a very crucial ballistic report which said that the bullets were first fired at inspector Mohan Chand Sharma who was killed during the encounter. The defence had argued that the police party had first resorted to firing. It was also alleged that the police had first fired at suspected Indian Mujahideen Atif Ameen and Mohammad Sajid.
However, the counter-argument was that had the police resorted to fire first, then both these persons would have fallen down immediately after being injured, and would be in no position to fire at the police. Hence, it was established by the police that it was the suspected terrorists who were trapped inside the house who had fired first, and the cops had just returned the fire.
The prosecution argued that the police only resorted to return the fire after Sharma and Balwant Singh (another Delhi police personnel) were first hit by bullets. The Delhi police were also given a clean chit in a 30-page report by the National Human Rights Commission.
However, Shehzad’s counsel argued that bullets found on Sharma did not match with the weapon that the police had recovered from the accused. However, the Delhi police proved this wrong in court and also added that not only had Shehzad destroyed evidence and obstructed police officials, he even managed to flee the spot.
However, another IM suspect Saif surrendered before the police, and led them to Shehzad, who was convicted by the court on Thursday and held guilty of murder and conspiracy.
Image:A protest rally against Batla House encounter by teachers and students of Jamia Millia Islamia University.
Photo courtesy: Wikimedia Commons
Batla House encounter fake? Digvijay says yes, PC says no
Batla House encounter: Accused claims he never confessed
Batla encounter case raises more questions than it answers
Batla House case: Suspected IM man convicted for cop's murder
The curious case of Batla House encounter: A chronology