Hoor Fatima
In a case that had come to symbolise delay, denial, and institutional silence, the judiciary has finally spoken—and when it did, justice breathed again.
A Delhi court’s decision to take cognizance of the CBI chargesheet and summon two Delhi Police personnel in the death of Faizan, a 23-year-old Muslim man brutally beaten during the 2020 Delhi riots, marks a crucial moment for the rule of law. It is a reminder that while justice may be delayed, it is not always defeated.
Faizan’s case had shaken the nation when a video surfaced showing police personnel beating injured Muslim men and forcing them to sing the national anthem. Faizan was seen bleeding, barely able to sit, yet subjected to further violence. Days later, he was dead.
For years, accountability remained elusive.
The Judiciary Steps In
What restores faith today is not just the summons—but how the courts refused to look away.
After finding the Delhi Police investigation wanting, the Delhi High Court in July 2024 took the bold and principled step of transferring the probe to the Central Bureau of Investigation, making it clear that justice cannot be investigated by those who stand accused of violating it.
Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani, in words that resonated far beyond the courtroom, called out the failure unequivocally—describing the incident as a hate crime and criticising the police probe as “tardy, sketchy, and too little, too late.” He underlined a fundamental truth:
when custodians of the law are accused, credibility demands independence.
Accountability Begins
Following the CBI’s investigation, a chargesheet was filed against Head Constable Ravinder Kumar and Constable Pawan Yadav under Sections 323, 325, and 304(II) of the IPC.
Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Mayank Goel, acknowledging the evidence on record, summoned the accused to appear before the court on February 24, observing that sufficient material exists to proceed.
This judicial acknowledgment is not procedural—it is profound. It sends a clear message that uniforms do not place anyone above the law, and that authority without accountability has no place in a constitutional democracy.
A Mother’s Faith, the Court’s Resolve
The case reached this point because Kismatun, Faizan’s mother, refused to surrender to silence. Her plea forced the system to confront its own failures—and the courts responded with courage and clarity.
By ordering an independent probe and allowing the law to take its course, the judiciary reaffirmed its role as the last refuge for the powerless.
Why This Matters
This is not just about Faizan.
It is about every citizen who believes that justice must not bow to power, uniform, or ideology.
In a time when public trust in institutions is fragile, the courts have reminded the nation of a simple but vital principle:
justice does not belong to the strong—it belongs to the right.
Faizan’s life cannot be returned.
But the court’s intervention ensures that his death is not buried under indifference.
Today, the judiciary did more than summon the accused.
It restored faith.
