A Delhi Court today granted bail to Umar Khalid in a Delhi Riots case arising out of the FIR registered at PS Khajuri Khas (State v. Umar Khalid).."The investigation in the matter is complete and chargesheet has already been filed. The trial in the matter is likely to take long time. The applicant has been in judicial custody in the matter since 01.10.2020. The applicant cannot be made to incarcerate in jail for infinity merely on account of the fact that other persons who were part of the riotous mob have to be identified and arrested in the matter.", the Court ruled. .Amongst other bail conditions, Additional Sessions Judge Vinod Yadav of the Karkardooma Court directed Umar Khalid to install the Aarogya Setu app on his phone upon his release. .The other bail conditions are that Khalid shall not tamper with evidence or influence any witness in any manner and shall maintain peace and harmony in the locality. .Khalid has also been directed to appear before the Court on each and every date of hearing and is also required to furnish his mobile number to SHO, PS Khajuri Khas upon his release from the jail..Khalid was granted bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs 20,000 with one surety of the like amount..The present FIR was registered with respect to the violence that broke out at the main Karawal Nagar Road, near Chand Bagh Pulia on February 24, 2020. .The case concerns the rioting which took place at or around the house of main accused Tahir Hussain..Besides seeking bail on grounds of parity with other co-accused, Khalid argued that he had been falsely implicated in the matter by the investigating agency on account of “political vendetta to muzzle the dissent”..It was submitted that neither was he present at the scene of crime on the date of the incident nor was there material on record to show that there was any meeting took place between Tahir Hussain and him..The offence of “criminal conspiracy” was already a subject matter of another FIR and therefore, Khalid could not be prosecuted for the same offence twice, it was submitted. .[DELHI RIOTS] "Sufficient material to proceed against Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam:" Delhi Court takes cognizance of chargesheet under UAPA.It was inter alia argued that the investigation in the matter was complete and no useful purpose would be served keeping him behind bars in the matter as the trial was likely to take a long time..The Prosecution, on the other hand, claimed that the “common object” of the accused persons was to cause maximum damage to the persons and property(ies) of other community. Since co-accused persons in the matter were very well known to Khalid, there was quick “meeting of minds” in the case, it was added. .Opposing the bail, the Prosecution argued that investigation of the case was still in progresses many persons who were part of the “riotous mob” were yet to be identified and arrested.. The “conspiracy angle” behind such a large-scale riot needed to be unearthed, it was further contended. .The Court noted that it was not the prosecution's case that Khalid was physically present at the scene. Khalid had prima facie been roped in the matter on basis of his own disclosure statement and that of co-accused persons' Tahir Hussain and Khalid Saifi..Opining that it did not find any rationale in the act of police in involving Khalid in the present FIR for the offence of conspiracy, the Court observed, "Even no recovery of any sort has been effected from the applicant pursuant to his disclosure statement.Be that as it may, it is relevant to note here that said PW Rahul Kasana is also a witness in case FIR No.59/2020, in which case also the “criminal conspiracy” angle is being investigated by Special Cell of Delhi Police. In the said case the statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C of PW Rahul Kasana was recorded on 21.05.2020, on which date he did not utter a single word against the applicant qua “criminal conspiracy” and now all of a sudden, he vide his statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C in the matter on 27.09.2020 blew the trumpet of “criminal conspiracy” against the applicant. This prima facie does not appeal to the senses...I find absolutely no substance in the argument of learned Special PP that in a case of criminal conspiracy, the disclosure statement of co-accused can be read against another co-accused, merely on the ground that pursuant thereto the CDRs of co-accused were unearthed which led to the recovery of fact of meeting dated 08.01.2020.The sole evidence of this so called conspiracy is a statement of PW Rahul Kasana, wherein he stated on 27.09.2020 that he was standing outside a building in the area of Shaheen Bagh, where he had dropped principal accused Tahir Hussain and thereafter he saw applicant and Khalid Saifi going into the same building. I fail to understand from the aforesaid statement how a lofty claim of conspiracy can be inferred.".The Court further recorded that there was no CCTV footage/viral video of Khalid from the crime spot and no independent witness or police witness had identified him. It thus stated, "The applicant cannot be permitted to remain behind bars in this case on the basis of such a sketchy material against him..In my humble opinion, chargesheeting the applicant in this case on the basis of such an insignificant material is unwarranted.". The Court ultimately opined that Umar Khalid deserved bail in the matter on the ground of parity with co-accused Khalid Saifi..SPP Manoj Chaudhary appeared for State. .Senior Advocate Trideep Pais with Advocates Sanya Kumar, Rakshanda Deka appeared for Umar Khalid. .Read the order:
A Delhi Court today granted bail to Umar Khalid in a Delhi Riots case arising out of the FIR registered at PS Khajuri Khas (State v. Umar Khalid).."The investigation in the matter is complete and chargesheet has already been filed. The trial in the matter is likely to take long time. The applicant has been in judicial custody in the matter since 01.10.2020. The applicant cannot be made to incarcerate in jail for infinity merely on account of the fact that other persons who were part of the riotous mob have to be identified and arrested in the matter.", the Court ruled. .Amongst other bail conditions, Additional Sessions Judge Vinod Yadav of the Karkardooma Court directed Umar Khalid to install the Aarogya Setu app on his phone upon his release. .The other bail conditions are that Khalid shall not tamper with evidence or influence any witness in any manner and shall maintain peace and harmony in the locality. .Khalid has also been directed to appear before the Court on each and every date of hearing and is also required to furnish his mobile number to SHO, PS Khajuri Khas upon his release from the jail..Khalid was granted bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs 20,000 with one surety of the like amount..The present FIR was registered with respect to the violence that broke out at the main Karawal Nagar Road, near Chand Bagh Pulia on February 24, 2020. .The case concerns the rioting which took place at or around the house of main accused Tahir Hussain..Besides seeking bail on grounds of parity with other co-accused, Khalid argued that he had been falsely implicated in the matter by the investigating agency on account of “political vendetta to muzzle the dissent”..It was submitted that neither was he present at the scene of crime on the date of the incident nor was there material on record to show that there was any meeting took place between Tahir Hussain and him..The offence of “criminal conspiracy” was already a subject matter of another FIR and therefore, Khalid could not be prosecuted for the same offence twice, it was submitted. .[DELHI RIOTS] "Sufficient material to proceed against Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam:" Delhi Court takes cognizance of chargesheet under UAPA.It was inter alia argued that the investigation in the matter was complete and no useful purpose would be served keeping him behind bars in the matter as the trial was likely to take a long time..The Prosecution, on the other hand, claimed that the “common object” of the accused persons was to cause maximum damage to the persons and property(ies) of other community. Since co-accused persons in the matter were very well known to Khalid, there was quick “meeting of minds” in the case, it was added. .Opposing the bail, the Prosecution argued that investigation of the case was still in progresses many persons who were part of the “riotous mob” were yet to be identified and arrested.. The “conspiracy angle” behind such a large-scale riot needed to be unearthed, it was further contended. .The Court noted that it was not the prosecution's case that Khalid was physically present at the scene. Khalid had prima facie been roped in the matter on basis of his own disclosure statement and that of co-accused persons' Tahir Hussain and Khalid Saifi..Opining that it did not find any rationale in the act of police in involving Khalid in the present FIR for the offence of conspiracy, the Court observed, "Even no recovery of any sort has been effected from the applicant pursuant to his disclosure statement.Be that as it may, it is relevant to note here that said PW Rahul Kasana is also a witness in case FIR No.59/2020, in which case also the “criminal conspiracy” angle is being investigated by Special Cell of Delhi Police. In the said case the statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C of PW Rahul Kasana was recorded on 21.05.2020, on which date he did not utter a single word against the applicant qua “criminal conspiracy” and now all of a sudden, he vide his statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C in the matter on 27.09.2020 blew the trumpet of “criminal conspiracy” against the applicant. This prima facie does not appeal to the senses...I find absolutely no substance in the argument of learned Special PP that in a case of criminal conspiracy, the disclosure statement of co-accused can be read against another co-accused, merely on the ground that pursuant thereto the CDRs of co-accused were unearthed which led to the recovery of fact of meeting dated 08.01.2020.The sole evidence of this so called conspiracy is a statement of PW Rahul Kasana, wherein he stated on 27.09.2020 that he was standing outside a building in the area of Shaheen Bagh, where he had dropped principal accused Tahir Hussain and thereafter he saw applicant and Khalid Saifi going into the same building. I fail to understand from the aforesaid statement how a lofty claim of conspiracy can be inferred.".The Court further recorded that there was no CCTV footage/viral video of Khalid from the crime spot and no independent witness or police witness had identified him. It thus stated, "The applicant cannot be permitted to remain behind bars in this case on the basis of such a sketchy material against him..In my humble opinion, chargesheeting the applicant in this case on the basis of such an insignificant material is unwarranted.". The Court ultimately opined that Umar Khalid deserved bail in the matter on the ground of parity with co-accused Khalid Saifi..SPP Manoj Chaudhary appeared for State. .Senior Advocate Trideep Pais with Advocates Sanya Kumar, Rakshanda Deka appeared for Umar Khalid. .Read the order:
