How the Ankit Sharma murder case ended in Tahir Hussain’s conviction | Explained
The murder of Intelligence Bureau (IB) officer Ankit Sharma during the 2020 Northeast Delhi riots became one of the most closely watched criminal cases arising
The murder of Intelligence Bureau (IB) officer Ankit Sharma during the 2020 Northeast Delhi riots became one of the most closely watched criminal cases arising from the communal violence that followed protests against the Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA). The riots claimed 53 lives, injured hundreds and displaced many families. More than six years later, on July 12, 2026, a Delhi court convicted former Aam Aadmi Party councillor Tahir Hussain and four others for Sharma’s murder. On July 31, all five were sentenced to life imprisonment. While describing the killing as “exceptionally brutal”, the court held that the case did not satisfy the legal threshold for the death penalty under the “rarest of rare” doctrine. The case On February 25, 2020, 26-year-old IB officer Ankit Sharma stepped out of his home in Northeast Delhi during the peak of the riots and never returned. Late that night, his father, Ravinder Kumar, who was in the Delhi Police, lodged a missing person’s complaint at the Dayalpur police station. The following day, Sharma’s body was recovered from a drain near Chand Bagh. His post-mortem report recorded 51 external injuries, including multiple stab wounds and blunt-force trauma.
Why was Tahir Hussain accused? In his statement to the police, Ravinder Kumar alleged that his son had been taken by rioters to a building owned by Tahir Hussain, where he was killed. The Crime Branch investigation recovered petrol bombs, stones, acid packets, slingshots and other projectiles from the crime site. Investigators also relied on CCTV footage, forensic evidence and the testimonies of 91 witnesses. The prosecution argued that this evidence showed that Tahir Hussain was part of the unlawful assembly, his premises were used during the violence and that he actively encouraged or facilitated the attacking mob. It held that Sharma was intercepted by the same violent unlawful assembly, repeatedly assaulted and stabbed before his body was dumped in the drain. Based on the investigation, the police charged Hussain and 10 others with offences including murder, kidnapping, rioting with deadly weapons, unlawful assembly and promoting enmity between communities under the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The defence disputed both the investigation and the prosecution’s case. It alleged that the FIR had been ante-timed and questioned delays in recording the statements of the witnesses. It also contended that several eyewitnesses had altered their versions during trial and some of them did not identify Hussain as part of the mob.
The BriefWire