Activists Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam, Gulfisha Fatima, who are in jail in connection with the larger conspiracy case in relation to the 2020 North East Delhi riots, told the Supreme Court on Friday that they did not make any calls for violence and were only exercising their right to peaceful protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) [Umar Khalid v. State of NCT Delhi].

While Khalid told the Court that he was not even in Delhi when the riots took place, Imam said that he never made any calls for violence but only called for peaceful blockades.

"Petitioner was not even in Delhi when the riots took place. If I am not there, how can the riots be connected to it," Khalid's counsel said.

"I abhor violence. No calling out for violence at all. Only peaceful protests," Imam's lawyer submitted.

Fatima too said that there was no evidence of any violence at the protests sites where she was present.

"The allegations against me is that I set up protest site. No act of violence at any of those sites. No documentary or oral evidence of anyone carrying chilli powder, acid etc at any of the sites where I was present," counsel for Fatima contended.

A Bench of Justices Aravind Kumar and NV Anjaria was hearing bail pleas filed by Khalid, Imam, Fatima and three other accused in the Delhi riots larger conspiracy case.

The hearing is yet conclude and will continue on November 3 at 10.30 am.

Background

Khalid and others moved the top court against the Delhi High Court's September 2 order denying them bail. The top court had issued notice to the police on September 22.

The riots occurred in February 2020 following clashes over the then-proposed Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA). As per the Delhi Police, the riots caused the death of 53 persons and injured hundreds.

The present case pertains to allegations that the accused had hatched a larger conspiracy to cause multiple riots. The FIR in this case was registered by a Special Cell of the Delhi Police under various provisions of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the UAPA.

Most of the accused were booked in multiple FIRs, leading to multiple bail petitions before different courts. Most have been in custody since 2020.

Khalid was arrested in September 2020 and charged with criminal conspiracy, rioting, unlawful assembly as well as several other offences under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA).

He has been in jail since then.

The trial court had first denied him bail in March 2022. He then approached the High Court, which also denied him relief in October 2022, prompting him to file an appeal before the top court.

In May 2023, the Supreme Court sought the response of the Delhi Police in the matter. His plea before the top court was then adjourned 14 times.

On February 14, 2024, he withdrew his bail plea from the Supreme Court  citing a change in circumstances.

On May 28, the trial court rejected his second bail petition. Appeal against the same was dismissed by the Delhi High Court on September 2, prompting the present plea before the apex court.

Imam too was booked in multiple FIRs across several States, mostly under sedition and UAPA charges.

In the case registered over speeches he gave at Jamia Milia Islamia University and Aligarh Muslim University, he was granted bail by the Delhi High Court last year. In the sedition cases registered in Aligarh and Guwahati, he was granted bail by the Allahabad High Court in 2021 and the Gauhati High Court in 2020, respectively. He was also booked in FIRs in Arunachal Pradesh and Manipur.

The Court had earlier pulled up the Delhi Police for failing to file its response to the bail pleas.

Subsequently, the Delhi Police filed a 389-page affidavit detailing why the accused should not be granted bail.

The Police claimed irrefutable documentary as well as technical evidence that pointed to a conspiracy for a "regime-change operation" and plans to incite nationwide riots on communal lines and kill non-Muslims.

Arguments today

During the hearing today, Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing for Gulfisha Fatima, flagged the extraordinary delay in trial and pointed out that Fatima has been behind bars for over 5 years as undertrial. He deprecated how the investigating agency had been prolonging the probe by filing supplementary chargesheets.

"I am in jail since 5 years 5 months from April, 2020. The chargesheet is filed on 16.9.2020. now they make an annual ritual to file a supplementary chargesheet every year. It has to be decided at a later date if an investigation can be kept ongoing by such supplementary chargesheets. There has been inordinate delay for even consideration," he said.

He also highlighted that Fatima is the only woman accused currently in custody.

Singhvi pointed out that the matter before the trial court is currently at the stage of arguments on framing of charge.

"Arguments on charge ongoing and charges not framed," he said.

"When did it commence?" the Bench asked.

"October 2024. 939 witnesses shown. Merits do not matter here," Singhvi responded.

He also pointed out how other women accused in the case, Devangana Kalita and Nartasha Narwal of Pinjra Tod group, got bail.

"Allegations are we are part of Pinjra Tod female group. Then allegations of secret meeting etc. Devangana and Natasha also get bail...I am not a member of Pinjra Tod. Two others who were part of it have got bail," he said.

He contended that there was nothing connecting the riots to Fatima and there was no violence at the anti-CAA protests sites associated with Fatima.

"The allegations against me is that I set up protest site. No act of violence at any of those sites. No documentary or oral evidence of anyone carrying chilli powder, acid etc at any of the sites where I was present," Singhvi submitted.

Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Umar Khalid, said that the prosecution has been delaying the trial and then blaming Khalid for the same.

"They say it is me who is taking time and delaying the case whereas the fact says otherwise. Charge against me is conspiracy. There are 751 FIRs.. Petitioner was not even in Delhi when the riots took place. If I am not there, how can the riots be connected to it. Out of 751, I was made party to only one," Sibal said.

Senior Advocate Siddhartha Dave, appearing for Sharjeel Imam, submitted that the prosecution took 3 years to finish the investigation.

"Prosecution took 3 years to complete the probe. 3 years. Trial could not progress because they said probe was on. So out of 5, 3 years go away," he contended.

He said that Imam is in custody because of a supplementary chargesheet.

"I am in custody because first supplementary chargesheet is filed against me. There is no delay by me till 2024. Petitioner has been in continuous custody since January 25, 2020 - almost 5 years 2 months. I had given speeches in December and January (2020). The present FIR of March 2020 and for these two months also I was in custody," he said.

Dave said that Imam was already in custody before the riots.

"I have mentioned reasons for the dismissal of the impugned order. It is alleged that speeches were given to cause mass mobilisation of muslims. If I am in custody since Jan what role will I play in orchestrating these riots. So at best this FIR is for giving some speeches," Dave contended.

"What is the nature of speech," the Bench asked.

"That I called for chakka jam. Like you call for blockade. For the protest against the CAA bill," Dave replied.

He underlined that Imam did not make any calls for violence.

"See the speeches. I abhor violence. No calling out for violence at all. Only peaceful protests," Dave argued.

The hearing will continue on November 3, Monday.

[Read Live Coverage]