Sibal: now change of law- in Zaroor Ahmed Watali- material prima facie true-surface analysis of probative evidence and test quality of evidence and then come to the conclusion- what did the HC say? he made a speech which is good enough. We cited Vernon, the HC does not take note of it. No overt or covert act attributed to me and I am in conspiracy!

J Kumar: there contention is your provocative speech [influenced others]

Sibal: that is mylords for you to decide because if that are the speeches, many of us would be liable to go to jail.

J Kumar: we have reservation about going into merits

Sibal: I did not go in merits and once I have undergone 5 years, what's the point of going into merits. And what public interest would be served because if I come out, surely I can't single-handedly influence and what purpose would be served to continue me in custody.

In George Fernandandis' days, the railways were not allowed to move, the Kisan or Gujar agitation but there was no UAPA.

J Kumar: in sikh riots

Sibal: Not in sikh riots. In fact, i was a counsel allowed to go around and what I found was horrific! What have these kids done? you can't say its a terrorist act. there are other ways to deal with it but not this.

Now, HC doesn't deal with anyone the test set out in Vernon. At some stage, the HC says as far as the plea made on behalf of the Appellants that the alleged acts of the Appellants, would at best, fall under Section 13 of the UA(P) Act, that is, Chapter III of the UA(P) Act, but not under Chapter IV of the UA(P) Act, is concerned, we may note that this Court, while exercising its appellate jurisdiction in the present proceedings, arising from the refusal to grant bail, is not required nor is it empowered to hold a detailed analysis of the evidence for determining the validity of the accusations levelled against the Appellants-same thing happend in trial court, so where do we go?

We cited Vernon, and what does the court say? the HC does the probative value of evidence has to be arrived at by the trial court.

reads a document about secret meeting- calls for regime change will come from streets- what gave statement? Rahul Roy who is not an accused and I am not attributed- this is strange!

Then reads another by yogendra yadav- not an accused.

Safoor Zangar on bail, Sam Kasami not an accused. They are citing this against me. See statement of Bond, protected witness-“On 22.02.2020, Chakka-Jaam was done at Jafrabad. On the same day at about 10 PM, JCC called an urgent meeting at JCC office which was attended by Safoora, Saiful Islam, Asif Tanha, AAZMI office bearers among others. I was also present in the meeting. In that meeting Safoora said that in North-East, Chakka-Jaam has to be started and others sites liked at Hauzrani. Asif said that he has received instructions from Umar Khalid and Nadeem Khan that they have to go to protest sites and start riots by Chakka-Jaam. Only then Government will take back the bill, then Saiful also said he has also received same instructions from Umar and Nadeem Khan and also said that when shots are fired and bomb is set of during riots then leave well within time. After this 20/25 members of the JCC left for protest sites”- none of these accused- those who made these statements are not accused.