The Supreme Court will deliver its verdict on January 5 on bail pleas filed by Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam and other accused in the 2020 Delhi riots conspiracy case.
Delhi Police has opposed bail, arguing the riots were pre-planned and that acts and speeches of one accused can be attributed to others in a larger conspiracy.
The accused, booked under UAPA and IPC, have challenged the Delhi High Court’s refusal of bail in a case linked to violence during protests against the CAA-NRC.
Supreme Court To Rule On Bail Pleas In 2020 Delhi Riots Case On Jan 5
Verdict awaited on bail requests of Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam and others booked under UAPA
Summary
On January 5, the Supreme Court will give its verdict on the bail requests made by activists Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam, and other accused in the conspiracy case involving the 2020 Delhi riots.
A bench consisting of Justices Aravind Kumar and N V Anjaria will provide a decision regarding the accused's multiple pleas.
After hearing arguments from Delhi Police's Solicitor General Tushar Mehta and Additional Solicitor General S V Raju, as well as the accused's senior attorneys Kapil Sibal, Abhishek Singhvi, Siddhartha Dave, Salman Khurshid, and Sidharth Luthra, the top court postponed its decision on the accused's separate pleas on December 10.
Strongly opposing the bail pleas, the Delhi Police had said the February 2020 riots were not spontaneous, but an “orchestrated, pre-planned and well-designed” attack on India's sovereignty.
Police had said that Sharjeel Imam's speeches can be attributed to other accused and can be used as evidence against them in the case.
S V Raju had contended that all the participants are liable for each other's acts in a conspiracy.
“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 had told the bench, which conducted hearings on the bail pleas on multiple days.
The additional solicitor general had argued that Khalid deliberately planned to leave Delhi before the riots as he wanted to deflect responsibility.
Imam had been "labelled" a "dangerous intellectual terrorist" without a thorough trial or a single conviction, and he had shown his distress in front of the supreme court when requesting release.
In his defence of Imam, senior attorney Siddharth Dave argued that his detention on January 28, 2020—prior to the communal violence that shook Northeast Delhi—was due to his remarks, which by themselves could not be considered "criminal conspiracy" in the riots case.
Advertisement
Khalid, Imam, Fatima, Meeran Haider and Shifa Ur Rehman have been booked under the stringent anti-terror law, Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (UAPA), and provisions of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for allegedly being the "masterminds" of the riots, which left 53 people dead and more than 700 injured.
According to Section 16 of the UAPA, “Whoever commits a terrorist act shall, if such act has resulted in the death of any person, be punishable with death or imprisonment for life, and shall also be liable to fine.” The violence erupted during widespread protests against the Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA) and the National Register of Citizens (NRC).
The accused moved the apex court, challenging the Delhi High Court's September 2 order denying them bail in the “larger conspiracy” case of the February 2020 riots.
Published At: