A killing that shook Delhi — and the case that still haunts it
More than four years after the Northeast Delhi riots, the murder of Ankit Sharma remains one of the most disturbing chapters from those three days of violence. The 34-year-old Intelligence Bureau security assistant went missing on February 25, 2020, as clashes raged across Chand Bagh and Jafrabad. His body was pulled from a drain the next day, bearing what investigators say were over 200 injuries — a mix of deep stab wounds and blunt-force trauma that pointed to a brutal assault.
Sharma’s family lives in the same neighborhood. His father, Ravinder, also works with the Intelligence Bureau. They told police he stepped out during a lull hoping to return home safely. Witness accounts collected later describe a tense scene near the Chand Bagh bridge, where rival groups had been hurling stones and petrol bombs through the evening. Somewhere in that chaos, Sharma was cornered.
The post-mortem, conducted at GTB Hospital and summarized in case records, became the backbone of the murder case. Investigators said the injury pattern suggested a sustained, targeted attack. The drain where his body surfaced runs along one of the hardest-hit stretches of the riot map — a grim waterline that collected victims and debris over two days of street battles.
The riots themselves broke out between February 24 and 26, 2020, after weeks of tension around protests against the new citizenship law near Jafrabad. Clashes between groups supporting and opposing the law spiraled fast. By the time police restored order, at least 53 people were dead and hundreds were injured. More than 750 criminal cases were eventually registered across the affected police stations.
What the investigation says — and where the case stands now
Sharma’s murder was probed by the Delhi Police Crime Branch. The FIR named former AAP councillor Tahir Hussain and several others based on witness statements from the area. In chargesheets filed over the following months, police alleged a criminal conspiracy that included rioting, promoting enmity, and murder. Sections of the Indian Penal Code invoked in the case include 147, 148, 149 (rioting and unlawful assembly), 153A (promoting enmity), 302 (murder), 120B (criminal conspiracy), and related provisions.
Investigators say they pulled together CCTV footage, phone records, and eyewitness accounts to build a timeline. They claim camera feeds from buildings in Chand Bagh — including Hussain’s property — show groups gathering on rooftops with stones and petrol bombs. Police say the same rooftops became launchpads for attacks across the narrow lanes that connect Chand Bagh to the main road. Forensic teams catalogued projectiles, glass bottles, and burnt cloth from multiple spots near the scene.
In court filings, the Crime Branch has argued that Sharma was specifically targeted and then dumped in the drain to erase the trail. Call data records, the police say, place several accused near the bridge around the time he went missing. A few witnesses told investigators they saw a mob dragging a man before the crowd closed in. Those accounts, the police argue, match the location where the body was later found.
The defense has pushed back hard. Hussain has denied all allegations and says he was trying to contact police for help as violence grew around his house. His lawyers argue the footage is selective, that there’s no direct video proof showing him ordering an attack, and that he has been made a political scapegoat. They also say he evacuated his family, requested security, and could not have coordinated the violence alleged by the police at the same time.
A sessions court took cognizance of the charges and the case has since wound its way through multiple procedural stages. Several accused have sought bail, with mixed outcomes. The Delhi High Court has heard multiple petitions over the last few years, granting bail to some co-accused while rejecting others based on the nature of the evidence, the risk of tampering with witnesses, and the gravity of the charges. Hussain remains a key accused across several riot-related cases and has faced separate proceedings by financial enforcement agencies as well, though each case has moved at its own pace.
Inside the courtroom, the paper trail is heavy: hours of CCTV, dozens of witness statements, mobile tower dumps, and long forensic reports. The trial has moved slower than the family hoped, slowed by COVID-era disruptions and the sheer volume of riot cases clustered in the same courts. Prosecutors say they are still stitching together the chain of circumstances that point to each accused’s role. Defense teams keep stressing gaps — unclear frames, missing time stamps, contradictions in witness statements, and the crowd dynamics that make individual attribution hard.
Beyond this single case, the broader riot dockets show a similar pattern: prosecutors leaning on digital evidence, post-mortems, and phone data; defense teams challenging quality, continuity, and motive. In several matters, trial courts have framed charges while urging the prosecution to speed up witness examination. In others, judges have reprimanded investigating officers for delays or loose ends. Each order drips down to the Sharma case too, because it’s woven into the same map of violence and the same contested lanes.
For Sharma’s family, the case is not just about one indictment. It’s about recognition of a brutal killing they say was meant to send a message. They attend hearings when they can, trade updates with lawyers, and press for day-to-day proceedings. Their demand is simple: don’t let this fade. In their telling, the photographs from the autopsy and the recovery site ensure it won’t.
The neighborhood is still living with its scar tissue. Residents remember how the Chand Bagh bridge acted like a hinge — one side holding crowds who backed the citizenship law, the other packed with protestors who opposed it. When stones started flying, police struggled to hold the line. Shops shut in minutes, schools emptied out, and alleys turned into traps. In the weeks after, repair crews scraped scorch marks off shutters, and water tankers flushed soot down the drains that had carried bodies.
Where does the case go from here? The trial court will continue recording evidence, likely starting with police witnesses and medical experts tied to the autopsy. The High Court will keep hearing bail challenges and procedural appeals. If the prosecution can tie the location data, rooftop footage, and witness accounts into a clean chain, they’ll argue for a conviction under murder and conspiracy. The defense will try to pry open every weak link — the gaps in video, the confusion in the crowd, and the possibility that the mob acted without the command structure the police allege.
That’s why this case matters beyond one file number. It tests how well Indian courts can handle riot evidence in the smartphone era, how they weigh crowd behavior against individual liability, and how quickly they can deliver justice when emotions still run hot. For Delhi, the answers will shape not just a verdict, but how the city remembers three days that changed it.