Delhi Riots: High Court Vacates Interim Order Restraining Trial Court From Passing Final Orders On Framing Of Charge

The Delhi High Court on Friday (June 5) vacated its 2024 interim order restraining the trial court from passing any final order on framing of charges against the accused persons in relation to the UAPA case alleging a larger conspiracy into 2020 North East Delhi riots.

For context, the trial court is at the final stages of reserving the matter on framing of charges in the larger conspiracy case. While all the accused have concluded their arguments, the Delhi Police has to make its rejoinder submissions. 

Justice Neena Bansal Krishna today vacated the interim order passed by her in September 2024, while dismissing accused Devangana Kalita's plea seeking certain videos of the CAA-NRC protests and chats of WhatsApp groups gathered by the Police in two Delhi riots cases against her.

It was Kalita's case that the videos have been shot by someone commissioned by the Delhi Police on the basis of a tender.

However, the Court today allowed another plea filed by Kalita seeking permission to inspect unrelied documents stored in the malkhana.

A detailed order is awaited. 

Kalita was granted bail by the Delhi High Court in June 2021, along with co-accused Asif Iqbal Tanha and Natasha Narwal. The order was upheld by the Supreme Court in May as the Delhi Police's challenge was dismissed. In August, the trial court refused to provide entire CCTV footage pertaining to the North-East Delhi area and WhatsApp chats of groups of police officials to Kalita in the UAPA case.

FIR 59 of 2020 is being probed by Delhi Police's Special Cell. The case has been registered under various offences under the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967.

The accused in the case are Tahir Hussain, Umar Khalid, Khalid Saifi, Isharat Jahan, Meeran Haider, Gulfisha Fatima, Shifa-Ur-Rehman, Asif Iqbal Tanha, Shadab Ahmed, Tasleem Ahmed, Saleem Malik, Mohd. Saleem Khan, Athar Khan, Safoora Zargar, Sharjeel Imam, Faizan Khan and Natasha Narwal.

Case Title: Devangana Kalita v. State