Complaints written on the “direction/dictation” of police; “fictitious” witnesses; “fabricated” evidence; witness statement spiced up with “additional facts” by the Investigating Officer; “artificial claim” made by a constable of having seen an accused at the spot; identification of accused “shadowed with clouds of doubt”; and, cases “foisted” upon the accused.In 93 of the 97 acquittals so far in cases related to the Delhi riots of 2020, local courts in the National Capital have flagged serious impropriety in the police’s investigation in at least 17 cases, or nearly one in five of such cases, an investigation by The Indian Express has found.Records show that till the end of August 2025, verdicts have been pronounced in 116 of the 695 cases of rioting, arson and unlawful assembly filed by Delhi Police. Of these, 97 resulted in acquittals and 19 in convictions — this newspaper was able to access records related to 93 acquittals.Consider this:In at least 12 cases, the courts found that the police had introduced “artificial” witnesses or evidence that appeared to be “fabricated”.In at least two cases, witnesses testified that their statements were not their own but were dictated or supplemented by the police.And, in several other cases, the courts concluded that the investigation was driven by a need to simply close the case rather than ensure justice. In one case, the judge also pointed to the “manipulation” of case records.So much so, Additional Sessions Judge Parveen Singh stated in an order last month while acquitting six accused in one of these cases at the New Usmanpur police station: “There has been an egregious padding of evidence by the IO and this has resulted in serious trampling of the rights of the accused who have been probably charge sheeted only in order to show that this case is worked out… Such instances lead to serious erosion of the faith of the people in the investigating process and the rule of law.”At least 53 people were killed and over 700 injured during the riots in northeast Delhi in February 2020 amid protests over the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA).According to court records, the 17 acquittals where courts flagged fabricated evidence include five cases registered at the Dayalpur police station, four each in Khajuri Khas and Gokalpuri, and one each in Jyoti Nagar, Bhajanpura, Jafrabad and New Usmanpur — all located in northeast Delhi.In all of them, the judges at the Karkardooma courts flagged a wide range of irregularities, including two near-identical findings where the court stated that the police’s failure to conduct a Test Identification Parade (TIP) led to the inference that they were “already aware” the case against a man named as accused in both instances was “fabricated”:Story continues below this ad‘Artificial’ witness, ‘fabricated’ caseOrder: Dec 16, 2022; FIR: 86/20; police station: Jyoti Nagar“Even the actual existence of any such person called Md. Aslam, who witnessed the commission of the alleged offences, comes under a shadow of doubt, and the possibility of him being a fictitious person cannot be denied.”Order: May 29, 2023; FIR: 223/20; police station: Khajuri Khas“The fact that the State falsely cited the complainant as a witness who can identify the accused as the offender, indicates that the case of the prosecution that the offence was committed by the accused Noor Mohammad is false… It appears that his statement was procured and prepared falsely and belatedly to solve this case…“Since TIP of the accused was not conducted by the police for identification by the complainant, it can be inferred that it was not carried out since the police was already aware that its case is fabricated and the accused has been shown as the offender only for solving of this case…”Order: May 30, 2023; FIR: 150/20; police station: Khajuri Khas“The fact that the State falsely cited the complainant as a witness who can identify the accused as the offender, indicates that the case of the prosecution that the offence was committed by the accused Noor Mohammad is false… It appears that his statement was procured and prepared falsely and belatedly to solve this case…Story continues below this ad“Since TIP of the accused was not conducted by the police for identification by the complainant, it can be inferred that it was not carried out since the police was already aware that its case is fabricated and the accused has been shown as the offender only for solving of this case…”Order: Aug 11, 2023; FIR: 209/20; police station: Khajuri Khas“In these circumstances, it is probable that an artificial claim of having seen accused Noora among the rioters… was made by PW (Prosecution Witness) 4 [Constable Rohtash].”Order: Aug 24, 2023; FIR: 79/20; police station: Dayalpur“IO was probably making artificial statement in respect of the time of getting knowledge about involvement of accused Javed… Such false claim of PW9 shows that even he made artificial statement regarding having properly seen the mob.”Order: Nov 29, 2023; FIR: 95/2020; police station: Gokalpuri“This consistency in the omission in the testimony of these police witnesses, indicate towards a possibility of fixed line of statement to be made by them… That situation indicates towards a possibility of artificial claim of witnessing the incident… (by) three alleged eye witnesses.”Story continues below this adOrder: Jan 1, 2024; FIR: 132/20; police station: Dayalpur“This scenario probabilize claim of PW7 regarding identifying Akram on 24.02.2020 to be artificial.”Order: March 14, 2024; FIR: 125/20; police station: Dayalpur“It was actually absurd claim of IO that if PW20 knew accused Raj Kumar @ Gole, then a secret informer was required to point out to him. This scenario reflects a kind of artificiality in the claim of IO.”Order: July 29, 2024; FIR: 41/2020; police station: Gokalpuri“Showing photographs of accused to PW6, when they were already arrested in this case, appears to be unnatural action, giving impression that PW6 was artificially made an eye witness to identify the accused persons.”Order: Oct 4, 2024; FIR: 126/2020; police station: Gokalpuri“Showing photographs of accused to PW6 and PW8, after long gap from arrest of accused persons in this case, appears to be unnatural action, giving impression that both of these two police staff were artificially made eye witness to identify the accused persons.”Story continues below this adOrder: May 14, 2025; FIR: 114/20; police station: Gokalpuri“Showing photographs of accused to PW9, when they were already arrested in this case, appears to be unnatural action, giving impression that PW9 was artificially made an eye witness to identify the accused persons.”Order: Aug 25, 2025; FIR: 99/20; police station: New Usmanpur“…merely in order to work out a case, a false case has been foisted upon the accused and PW10 HC Vikas, the only eye witness of the case, is completely unreliable qua these accused persons.”‘Dictated’ or ‘supplemented’ statementsOrder: Dec 9, 2022; FIR: 115/20; police station: JafrabadPW1 and PW2 are the only eye-witnesses to the commission of offences, and both of them have denied identifying the accused as one of the rioters, and have further stated that the particulars in the complaint… were written by them at the dictation of the police.”Order: June 7, 2023; FIR: 108/20; police station: Dayalpur“statement of this witness… would show that name of parents of all three accused persons were mentioned by IO. Such situation leads to two possibilities. Either PW27 was not deposing before the court correctly or his statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. was not a record of his actual knowledge about this case, rather it was prepared by IO after supplementing it with additional facts.”Story continues below this adMore ‘fabricated’ evidenceOrder: Sept 19, 2022; FIR: 153/20; police station: Khajuri Khas“…IO contradicted his own statement regarding getting information prior to 02.04.2020 of the relevant witness i.e. PW10, who could identify the culprits. Surprisingly, he did not record such information… identification of accused on 02.04.2020 was probably outcome of an afterthought development..”Order: March 13, 2024; FIR: 181/20; police station: Bhajanpura“…process of identification of accused persons by these two victims/ injured officials is shadowed with clouds of doubt…”Order: Aug 14, 2025; FIR: 78/20; police station: Dayalpur“…there is a probable manipulation in the case diary with regard to the statement (of a witness).”