[Delhi Riots] Court frames sedition, UAPA charges against Sharjeel Imam

A Delhi court on Tuesday formally framed sedition and other charges, including those under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), against Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) student Sharjeel Imam in a Delhi riots case [State v. Sharjeel Imam]..Additional Sessions Judge Amitabh Rawat framed formal charges after ordering the same on January 24, 2022. On Tuesday, the Court framed formal charges under these provisions. Imam’s speeches, the transcription of which was recorded in the Court order, were stated to had prompted violence in Delhi. “You thus, brought into hatred or attempted to bring into hatred or to excited or attempted to excite dissatisfaction towards the government established by law in India, and thus, you committed an offence punishable under Section 124A IPC (Indian Penal Code) within the cognisance of this court.”The Court earlier order framing of charges and said “Order on charge has been passed. Accused is accordingly directed to be charged for the offences under Section 124A IPC, 153A IPC, 153B IPC, 505 IPC & 13 of UAPA. Vide separate order of even date, the application under Section 439 CrPC filed by accused Sharjeel Imam for grant of regular bail is dismissed.”Meanwhile, the Delhi High Court on March 11 issued notice to the State to file a response to Imam’s challenge to the framing of charges order.The matter will be heard on May 26..[Delhi Riots] Delhi court orders framing of Sedition, UAPA charges against Sharjeel Imam.The charges are of sedition, promoting enmity between groups, statements meant for public mischief, and unlawful activities.Tuesday's order also underlined Imam's speeches and the act of distributing pamphlets in Delhi and elsewhere that allegedly “promoted or attempted to promote, on grounds of religion, a feeling of enmity, hatred and ill-will between two communities i.e. Hindus and Muslims or act which was prejudicial to the maintenance of harmony between the said two communities and which was likely to disturb public tranquility”. He was, thus, said to have committed an offence punishable under Section 153A IPC within the cognisance of this courtThe case pertains to Imam’s allegedly provocative speeches in relation to the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) and the National Register of Citizens (NRC) at Jamia Millia Islamia in December 2019, and a speech given at the Aligarh Muslim University in January 2020..Defense counsel advocate Tanvir Ahmed Mir, had sought discharge and bail in the case while submitting that Imam was not a terrorist and was not related to any terrorist organisation. He was only a votary of social and economic equality having no political agenda, Mir had argued.The lawyer had also argued that Imam's speech, which was labelled as seditious, called for the society to unite and respond to the government's policy on CAA and NRC."Criticism of government policies is obviously protest. Criticism comes in the form of songs, movies, protests. He said block roads, etc., but there will be no people. This is what he advocates," he had submitted..Special Public Prosecutor Amit Prasad had contended that the fact that one of Imam’s speeches began with ‘assalam-o-alaikum’ demonstrated that it was only meant for a particular community and not the public at large.“Entire content focuses on two to three points. Speech was divisive. It wasn't a speech made for general public but a specific community. And he is attempting to create complete anarchy,” Prasad said, referring to one of Imam’s speeches..[Read Order]