Delhi riots: Role of Sharjeel Imam, Umar Khalid in conspiracy prima facie grave, says Delhi HC

New Delhi [India], September 2 (ANI): The Delhi High Court on Tuesday dismissed the bail pleas of nine accused, alongwith Sharjeel Imam and Umar Khalid. The High Court stated that the roles of Sharjeel Imam and Umar Khalid in the conspiracy are prima facie grave in view of the allegations against them.
Delhi Police have alleged that they delivered inflammatory speeches on communal lines to instigate a mass mobilisation of members of the Muslim Community.
The Division bench comprising justices Navin Chawla and Shalinder Kaur dismissed nine appeals and made certain remarks on the role of the accused persons.
While dismissing the appeals, the Division bench said that "in view of the allegations levelled, the role of Sharjeel Imam and Umar Khalid in the Conspiracy is prima facie grave".

"In the conspectus of the allegations levelled, it emerges that the role of Sharjeel Imam and Umar Khalid is prima facie grave in the entire conspiracy, having delivered inflammatory speeches on communal lines to instigate a mass mobilisation of members of the Muslim Community," the High Court said in the judgment.
The High Court rejected the appeals after considering the submissions by counsel for the accused persons and Solicitor General (SG) Tushar Mehta and Special Public Prosecutor (SPP) Amit Prasad, and considering the evidence on record.
The High Court said, " At this stage, considering the evidence on record and the events unfolding in the alleged conspiracy, prima facie it appears that the Appellants Sharjeel Imam and Umar Khalid were the first ones to act after the CAB was passed in early December 2019, by creating WhatsApp groups and distributing pamphlets in the Muslim populated areas calling for protests and Chakka-Jaams, including the disruption of essential supplies."
The Delhi High Court said, " Sharjeel Imam and Umar Khalid were the first ones to act after the CAB was passed in December 2019.
"They created WhatsApp groups and distributed pamphlets in the Muslim populated areas calling for protests and Chakka-Jaams, including the disruption of essential supplies," the High Court said.
The Delhi High Court also stated that the alleged inflammatory and provocative speeches delivered by Sharjeel Imam and Umar Khalid, when considered in totality, prima facie indicate their role in the alleged conspiracy.
The High Court rejected the contentions that the Sharjeel Imam and Umar Khalid were not in Delhi at the time of the riots.
"The mere absence of Sharjeel Imam a few weeks prior to the ultimate riots, and Umar Khalid's absence a day or two before, at this stage, may not be sufficient to mitigate their role. As they have been alleged to be the key conspirators in planning and designing the scheme of events," the High Court opined.
SG Tushar Mehta argued that each of the conspirators had played a vital role in the planning, strategising, and execution of the criminal conspiracy, all under the guise of protest against the CAA/NRC.
"The masterminds/top conspirators disseminated their messages through various speeches, pamphlets, WhatsApp Groups, etc., and their instructions were carried out by the foot soldiers," SG Mehta argued.
He also contended that "keeping in view the large-scale violence that was sought to be undertaken, and which eventually took place in late in February 2020, resulting in the loss of 53 lives, causing injuries to numerous members of the public, Police Officers and causing damage to public properties, the Appellants are not entitled to bail".
On the other hand, it was submitted by the counsel for the accused that the case of the prosecution against the Appellants (Sharjeel and Umar) is weak, since the evidence included in the Charge-sheet and the supporting material do not implicate the Appellants in any of the offences for which they have been Charge-sheeted.
It was submitted that the prosecution has no evidence of their presence in any meeting where violence was conspired. They have been made accused in the present case only on account of their call for chakka-jaam, and based on the statements of witnesses, most of whom have been shown as protected witnesses.
The defence counsel further argued that "the statements of such witnesses are merely a reproduction of each other, and when taken at face value, do not disclose the commission of the alleged offences by the Appellants, instead, appear to be concocted, and the witnesses have been coerced into giving such statements out of fear of arrest".
The counsel for Appellants Sharjeel and Umar Khalid submitted that they have not sent a single incriminating message to attract any criminal liability, and there is no basis to show that the discussions in WhatsApp groups, to which the Appellants were added, amount to offences under the UAPA.
It was also argued that there is a delay in the trial, and even charges have not been framed. Accused persons have been in prolonged incarceration for more than 5 years.
SPP Amit Prasad opposed the contention and had submitted that "while liberty and the right to a speedy trial of an accused are essential, it should be balanced against the interest of national security and public order, more so in cases involving allegations of terrorism and anti-national conduct". (ANI)