Delhi riots: Supreme Court to pronounce verdict on bail pleas of Umar, Sharjeel, others on January 5
Newly sworn in first Muslim Mayor of New York Zohran Mamdani recently wrote a letter of support to Umar Khalid
The Supreme Court will pronounce its verdict on the bail pleas of activists Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam and five other accused in the 2020 Delhi riots conspiracy case on Monday.
A Bench of Justice Aravind Kumar and Justice NV Anjaria, which reserved its verdict on separate petitions filed by the seven accused, will pronounce its verdict on January 5 when the top court reopens after the winter break.
The top court had reserved its verdict after hearing arguments from Solicitor General Tushar Mehta and Additional Solicitor General SV Raju for the Delhi Police and senior advocates Kapil Sibal, Abhishek Manu Singhvi, Siddhartha Dave, Salman Khurshid, Sidharth Luthra and others representing the accused.
Booked under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA), 1967, the seven accused — Khalid, Imam, Gulfisha Fatima, Meera Haider, Shifa Ur Rehman, Md. Saleem Khan and Shadab Ahmed — have been in jail for more than five years.
Newly sworn in first Muslim Mayor of New York Zohran Mamdani recently wrote a letter of support to Umar Khalid. A group of US lawmakers has also written a letter to Indian Ambassador to the US Vinay Kwatra, urging a “fair and timely” trial for Khalid in “accordance with international law”.
The accused are facing charges of criminal conspiracy, sedition, promoting enmity between various groups, making statements conducing to public mischief under the IPC and Section 13 of the UAPA, 1967, for allegedly questioning the sovereignty, unity, or territorial integrity of India and causing disaffection against it.
Besides the UAPA, the accused were also booked under certain provisions of the Indian Penal Code for allegedly being the “masterminds” of the “larger conspiracy” behind the February 2020 Delhi riots during the visit of the then US President Donald Trump that claimed 53 lives and left more than 700 injured. The violence had erupted during the protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) and the National Register of Citizens (NRC).
Terming the 2020 Delhi riots as an “orchestrated, pre-planned, and well-designed” attack on the sovereignty of India by a “regime change operation” executed under the guise of “peaceful protest”, Delhi Police vehemently opposed the bail pleas of the accused.
ASG Raju said Imam’s speeches can be attributed to other accused and can be used as evidence against them in the February 2020 Delhi riots. “Acts of one conspirator can be attributed to others. Sharjeel Imam’s speeches can be attributed to Umar Khalid. Sharjeel Imam’s case will be considered as evidence against the others,” he told the Bench.
The ASG alleged that Khalid deliberately planned to leave Delhi before the riots took place as he wanted to deflect responsibility. The planning was done by Khalid and it has been misstated that he was not the administrator of a WhatsApp group related to the riots, he said.
However, Imam asserted that he was not a terrorist or an anti-national as alleged by the Delhi Police. “I would like to say that I am not a terrorist, as I have been called by the respondent (police). I am not an anti-national as called by the State. I am a citizen of this country, a citizen by birth, and I have not been convicted for any offence till now,” senior counsel Siddhartha Dave, representing Imam, submitted during the arguments.
On behalf of Umar Khalid, senior advocate Kapil Sibal had submitted that he was not in Delhi when the riots happened in February 2020, and that he cannot be kept incarcerated “as if to say that I will punish you for your protests”. “You cannot attribute someone else’s speech to me and say I am responsible for the riots,” Sibal submitted.
On behalf of Fatma, Singhvi argued that the activist had spent under six years in incarceration and termed the delay in the trial “astonishing and unprecedented”.
