Delhi Riots: Accused Umar Khalid, others conclude submissions; Delhi Police to start arguments on Nov 11

Six accused persons in the larger conspiracy case connected to Delhi riots of 2020 concluded their arguments before the Supreme Court on Thursday in their petitions seeking bail in the case

A Bench of Justices Aravind Kumar and NV Anjaria heard accused Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam, Gulfisha Fatima, Meeran Haider, Shadab Ahmed and Mohd Saleem khan.

The Delhi Police will commence its arguments on November 11, Tuesday.

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

During the hearing of the matter on October 31, Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam and Gulfisha Fatima told the Court that they did not make any calls for violence and were only exercising their right to peaceful protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) 

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.

When the matter was heard on November 3, accused Meeran Haider told the Court that he had specifically objected to having Sharjeel Imam at the protests sites during the anti-Citizenship Amendment Act movement in 2020.

Haider's counsel Siddharth Agarwal said that Haider had tweeted against having Imam at the protest sites and hence, the argument that he conspired with Imam was false.

Arguments today

Senior Advocate Sidharth Luthra, appearing for accused Shadab Ahmed, pointed out that there has been no delay orchestrated by him when it came to trial.

"He is 27 years old and working as supervisor at NDS Enterprises Jagathpuri since 2016. Arguments on charge are going on but for me the arguments are over and no delay on my part," Luthra said.

He also said that while there are WhatsApp chats on record, Ahmed was not part of any of those chats.

"Lots of chats on record and I am not in those chats," he said.

"Why do you call it chakka jam," Justice Kumar asked.

"It means to stop the wheels of traffic. Those of us who were in Delhi University.. we know it. It's a very commonly used word which is very colloquial," Luthra replied.

With this the petitioners concluded their arguments.

The Delhi Police will commence their arguments on November 11, Tuesday.

[Read Live Coverage]