Noida: Nearly 11 years after Mohammad Akhlaq was lynched in Bisada village, his family’s counsel has filed an application before an additional sessions judge seeking permission for Akhlaq’s widow Ikraman to identify the accused in court before her cross-examination begins.The family has pointed out that the prosecution failed to get those standing trial in the 2015 case identified while her statement was being recorded. The case, which has faced repeated delays and legal twists, remains at the evidence stage and will next be heard on Sept 3.Lawyer Andaleeb Naqvi said failure to secure identification during Ikraman’s statement-in-chief was an inadvertent oversight. “Even if the witness has named the accused persons, their dock identification in the trial court is a necessary requirement to bring the trial to its logical end,” he said, citing a 2025 Supreme Court judgement.
Mohammad Akhlaq was lynched on September 28, 2015, in his Bisada house over rumors of cow slaughter and storing beef
The application argued that allowing identification now would not prejudice the accused because Ikraman’s cross-examination is yet to begin. Naqvi argued that denying the request, however, could seriously affect the prosecution adversely.The issue is significant because without identification in court, the defence could argue that those named by a witness are not necessarily the same individuals facing trial. Akhlaq’s daughter Shaista has completed her evidence and cross-examination, but the prosecution also missed the opportunity to have her identify the accused.On Sept 28, 2015, Akhlaq and his younger son Danish were attacked after rumours spread through a temple announcement that they had slaughtered a cow and stored beef. A mob stormed their Bisada home, dragged Akhlaq out and beat him to death. Danish was critically injured and survived after undergoing two surgeries on his head.Police initially named 10 accused in an FIR invoking provisions relating to murder, attempt to murder and house trespass, besides several unidentified persons. The number of accused later rose to 18. Three were declared juveniles, two have died and the remaining accused are out on bail.Last year, the state sought withdrawal of the case under Section 321 CrPC, citing contradictions in witness statements and forensic findings. Ikraman opposed the plea, calling it misleading and politically motivated.On Dec 23, the fast-track court rejected the withdrawal application and ordered day-to-day hearings. A subsequent plea by the accused to transfer the case was rejected by the district judge. The case was later shifted to the additional sessions judge-6 for administrative reasons.
