Umar Khalid, Sharjeel, Gulfisha Fatima Bail : Live Updates From Supreme Court Hearing | Delhi Riots UAPA Case

Raju: its not because they are innocent, it is because they are a party of larger conspiracy. Parity and change of circumstances I have discussed.

It was argued that vernon case has come and therefore changed of circumstances but it was applied at the stage of trial court and rejected.

Raju: umar khalid is connected with the mastermind. JCC was formed pursuant to Umar khalid' and Nadeem Khan directions. Umar was detained for violating curfew orders. Jamia Awareness Campaign team created on directions of Umar Khalid.

26 Dec 2019- Indian Social Institute meeting, Umar khalid was present and Delhi Protest Support Group was created and anybody could send message contrary to what was argued.

CDR location of umar khalid on 26.12.19 corroborates. 02.1.20, second meeting of DGSP in which Umar Khalid was present. He was there in almost all the meetings.

5 Jan 2020- Taslim texted to Umar that protests have started.

22. Feb 2020- Tasleem is reporting to umar as to what is happening, riots and chakka jam.

8. Jan 2020- Umar khalid, saifi conspiratorial meeting at PFI office. CDR location at shaheen bagh confirms

23 Jan 2020- Seelampur secret meeting with umar khalid, tasleem. There is gulfisha. There is statement of protected witness smith, said we have collected arms

J Kumar: this recorded subsequent to registeration of FIR

Raju: yes; then 17 Feb, umar khalid gave amarvati speech.

Tt was also argued that he was discharged. The order of discharge is not a discharge on merit but because it overlaps with this case.

J Kumar: FIR 59 was post 2020, how does it have to do with what happened before

Raju: its a case of conspiracy, they planned before this. You can plan one or two year in advance.

Continues to read about different evidence of secret meetings of Umar Khalid with other-accused persons.

J Kumar: all your compilations, please tell them to comply accused wise. It will be very difficult when we sit for dictating order, we will forget everything. Everything should be one compilation. One side each volume.

15. dec, 2019- first phase of riots

J Kumar: for this act, is there a separate FIR?

Raju: there is, but Umar khalid is not an accused; he was present.

Raju: [reading to a statement of protected witness] he wanted to deflect the responsibility to JCC. His role is corraborated with [another witness]. These are 164 statement.

Next point is- on admin of DPSG group- whatsapps groups and change of admin happened on 12.3.20. Before 12, he could send messages. They decided to delete everything on whatsapp, but before that he did. 11.4.20 they migrated to Signal. Important persons were removed from the group. Before arrests were made, he could post and delete.

12.3.20 changed group settings to allow only admins to send group. So the submission that he could not delete because he was not the admin is wrong.

Refers to Khalid's Bharat tere tukde tukde honge statement- the entire FIR, these anti-national slogans were raised was subject matter of FIR 110/2016. We have relied upon it in the chargesheet. Refers to a volume.

J Kumar: very difficult to maintain all this volume. It happens in supreme court only, in high courts its very beautiful running volumes. Our difficult starts with you two stop.

Raju: it was argued that witnesses are hearsay, he was not there. I will argue it is all wrong.

Raju: if you don't argue a case saying there is further investigation, the delay is attributable to you. If chargesheet is filed prima facie there is an offence made out and at that stage, the accused can't say it will wait till the investigation is over. Essentially they are saying wait for further investigation so that charges are modified

J Kumar: according to them, you are filing chargesheet intermittently

Raju: they can't wait till other evidence come. It may or may not come. Chargesheet was filed

J Kumar: Umar Khalid was not there in first

Raju: he came in the second,

J Kumar: their grievance is if you keep filing chargesheet the delay is attributable to you

Raju: you can't look at something that may come to delay arguments on charge. Refers to a judgment. There is no delay on the part of the prosecution.

J Kumar: from 2023 to 2024

Raju: if 17k existed in hardcopy, we gave them softcopy but they say they want hardcopy. As for Umar khalid, he knew riots were to take place and he wanted to create alibi. He brough tickets although it was expensive.

ASG SV Raju: mylords wanted me to give a written note. One judgment I would like to show a 2013 judgment. It was argued that there was nothing in Sharjeel Imam speech.

Reads a document- theory of agency applies in a conspiracy. Also refers to the Rajiv Gandhi assassination judgment.

Here prima facie is accepted because cognisance was taken for 120B IPC. Therefore, Sharjeel Imam's case will be considered as evidence against others.

On rejoinder-on delay not attributable to them- prosecution is ready to argue however objected by the accused persons.