[Delhi Riots] To speak up for mistreated minority doesn’t make him communal: Counsel for Umar Khalid to Delhi court

Speaking up for a minority community when they are mistreated doesn’t make Umar Khalid communal, his counsel argued on Wednesday seeking bail in an Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act case connected to the Delhi Riots [Umar Khalid v. State]..Arguing before Additional Sessions Judge Amitabh Rawat, Senior Advocate Trideep Pais also said that while the prosecution had attributed his client's silence on certain WhatsApp groups to criminality, it had not shown his “active” status on other groups to demonstrate the difference. “This is the first case where someone’s silence is read against me,” he added.According to Pais, the prosecution referred to his client’s silence on the Delhi Protest Support Group WhatsApp group to show criminality, besides making a mention of his involvement in the 2016 JNU sedition case..Referring to the JNU sedition case of 2016, the senior lawyer submitted,“If I'm a criminal since 2016 and I have developed this novel idea of silence, then I am a silent criminal.. Then have you compared from other WhatsApp groups? It's like saying if I'm silent, I'm a criminal...in other groups, I'm active.”Pais also pointed out that the catchphrase “tuke tukde gang” was not attributed to Khalid in 2016..The arguments were in rebuttal to Special Public Prosecutor Amit Prasad’s submissions against the bail plea of Khalid..“Referring to CAA and NRC as discriminatory doesn't make me communal,” Pais continued.He referred to Khalid’s PhD thesis, which was stated to be on the adivasis of Jharkhand.“Person picks up an issue… Can’t call him communal because he writes about a section of people. To speak up for a minority when they are mistreated doesn’t make him communal,” he stated..The Court was further informed by the senior counsel that the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) presented a situation where lot of people protested against it.“There's no doubt. Ramachandra Guha, TM Krishna and so many have spoke against this law,” Pais underlined.“My client happens to oppose discriminatory law and happens to belong to that community. Everybody picks their battles and chooses what to protest about. If prosecution were fair they would have found other people,” he submitted..Special Public Prosecutor Amit Prasad responded to this contention, saying, “Investigation is going on. The choice of accused is prerogative of the investigation agency. It is a settled law whether from the persons we'll make accused or witnesses.”On the point of the chargesheet using the words “diabolical, insidious, rabid” to denote the February 2020, violence, Pais argued there was nothing diabolical about Khalid’s speech in Amravati, Maharashtra.The prosecution has relied upon the speech to demonstrate the conspiracy charge against Khalid.“I'm talking about Gandhi, Constitution….Chargesheet is not about facts…A story which prosecution wants to peddle.”.[Delhi Riots] Umar Khalid is saying IO communal but first conviction was of a Hindu: Prosecution to Delhi court