SC reserves verdict on bail pleas of Khalid, Sharjeel, 4 others in Delhi riots case

The Supreme Court on Wednesday reserved its verdict on petitions filed by Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam and four other accused seeking bail in the Delhi riots larger conspiracy case.

Booked under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA), 1967, the six accused — Khalid, Imam, Gulfisha Fatima, Meeran Haider, Shifa Ur Rehman and Md. Saleem Khan— have been in jail for more than five years.

A Bench of Justice Aravind Kumar and Justice NV Anjaria reserved its verdict after Additional Solicitor General SV Raju concluded his arguments on behalf of the Delhi Police. The accused concluded arguments on their bail pleas on Tuesday.

The Bench asked the lawyers for various parties to submit written arguments by December 18.

The six 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.

On behalf of the Delhi Police, 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 submitted.

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.

Senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, representing Fatima, had argued that the activist has spent under six years in incarceration and termed the delay in the trial “astonishing and unprecedented”.

Senior advocates Salman Khurshid and Sidharth Luthra also advanced their submissions on behalf of other accused in the case.