TrendingVideosIndia
Opinions | CommentEditorialsThe MiddleLetters to the EditorReflections
UPSC | Exam ScheduleExam Mentor
State | Himachal PradeshPunjabJammu & KashmirHaryanaChhattisgarhMadhya PradeshRajasthanUttarakhandUttar Pradesh
City | ChandigarhAmritsarJalandharLudhianaDelhiPatialaBathindaShaharnama
World | ChinaUnited StatesPakistan
Diaspora
Features | The Tribune ScienceTime CapsuleSpectrumIn-DepthTravelFood
Business | My MoneyAutoZone
News Columns | Straight DriveCanada CallingLondon LetterKashmir AngleJammu JournalInside the CapitalHimachal CallingHill View
Don't Miss
Advertisement

Delhi riots: SC defers hearing on bail pleas of Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam and others to Sept 22           

The activists have challenged a September 2 Delhi High Court order which denied bail to 9 people
Umar Khalid. File photo

Unlock Exclusive Insights with The Tribune Premium

Take your experience further with Premium access. Thought-provoking Opinions, Expert Analysis, In-depth Insights and other Member Only Benefits
Yearly Premium ₹999 ₹349/Year
Yearly Premium $49 $24.99/Year
Advertisement

The Supreme Court on Friday adjourned to September 22 the hearing on bail pleas of activists Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam, Gulfisha Fatima and Meeran Haider in the UAPA case related to the alleged conspiracy behind the February 2020 riots in Delhi.

Advertisement

A bench of Justices Aravind Kumar and Manmohan deferred the pleas.

Advertisement

The activists have challenged a September 2 Delhi High Court order which denied bail to nine people, including Khalid and Imam, saying "conspiratorial" violence under the garb of demonstrations or protests by citizens could not be allowed.

Besides Khalid and Imam, those who faced bail rejection are Fatima, Haider, Mohd Saleem Khan, Shifa Ur Rehman, Athar Khan, Abdul Khalid Saifi and Shadab Ahmed.

The bail plea of another accused, Tasleem Ahmed, was rejected by a different high court bench on September 2.

Advertisement

The high court said the Constitution affords citizens the right to protest and carry out demonstrations or agitations, provided they are orderly, peaceful and without arms, and such actions must be within the bounds of law.

While the high court said the right to participate in peaceful protests and to make speeches in public meetings was said to have been protected under Article 19(1)(a), and couldn't be blatantly curtailed, it observed the right was "not absolute" and "subject to reasonable restrictions".

Advertisement
Tags :
#ActivistBail#ProtestRights#SharjeelImam#UmarKhalidBailPleasDelhiHighCourtDelhiRiotsfreespeechSupremeCourtUAPA
Show comments
Advertisement