SC's Verdict On Validity Of Sedition Law Will Have A Bearing: Delhi High Court Adjourns Bail Pleas Of Umar Khalid & Sharjeel Imam To May 6

The Delhi High Court on Friday adjourned to May 6 hearing in the appeals filed by student activists Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam challenging the Trial Court's orders refusing them bail in the Delhi riots larger conspiracy case.A division bench comprising of Justice Siddharth Mridul and Justice Rajnish Bhatnagar was of the view that since the matter pertaining to the challenge to the constitutional validity of the offence of Sedition under Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code is coming up for hearing before the Supreme Court on May 5, it would be appropriate to await the outcome of the same before hearing the appeals.It is pertinent to note that earlier this week, the Supreme Court posted to May 5 for final hearing the petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the sedition law. A bench comprising the Chief Justice of India NV Ramana, Justice Surya Kant and Justice Hima Kohli was considering two writ petitions filed by Army veteran Major-General SG Vombatkere (Retired) and the Editors Guild of India respectively."Matter regarding sec 124A of IPC is coming before Supreme Court. Findings of sec. 124A will have bearing on this case also," orally remarked Justice Bhatnagar. While Senior Advocate Trideep Pais appearing for Umar Khalid said that the outcome of the said challenge will not have a bearing on the merits of the matter, Justice Mridul remarked:"No matter the bearing, we should await the outcome."At the outset, Advocate Tanveer Ahmed Mir also mentioned a fresh appeal filed by Sharjeel Imam challenging the Trial Court order denying him bail in the UAPA case. Accordingly, the Court said that since Sharjeel is the purported co conspirator as alleged by the prosecution in the FIR, both the appeals will be heard together. While issuing notice on the appeal of Sharjeel Imam, the Court posted both the matters for further hearing on May 6.The Court also said that it will also hear another challenge made by Imam to a Trial Court order framing charges against him in a case relating to the alleged inflammatory speeches made by him in Aligarh Muslim University and Jamia area in Delhi against the Citizenship Amendment Act, on May 6 together with the appeals.Umar Khalid was denied bail by city's Karkardooma Court on March 24. He was arrested on 13 September, 2020 and has been under custody since.Earlier, Justice Rajnish Bhatnagar had asked Pais if it was proper to use the word 'jumla' against the Prime Minister of India."This word jumla is used against the Prime Minister of India. Is it proper?", Justice Bhatnagar had orally asked. Pais had responded that it is not illegal to be critical of the government or polices of the government.Justice Bhatnagar had also orally remarked thus:"There has to be a line for criticism also. There has to be a lakshman rekha."On the previous occasion, the bench, after reading the transcript of the speech, had observed that the speech was prima facie "obnoxious" and "offensive".Opposing the appeal, the prosecution had earlier told the Court that the "narratives" sought to be created by Khalid cannot be looked into as his defence at the stage of bail.In the short reply filed, the prosecution had further said that to view Khalid's role in isolation in the case of conspiracy will be impermissible in law.The prosecution also referred to the trial court orders dismissing bail pleas of co-accused namely Shifa-ur-Rehman and Khalid Saifi to argue that the same would clearly demonstrate the length and breadth of the conspiracy, role played by different entities, WhatsApp Groups and individuals in pursuance to the said conspiracy.Accordingly, the prosecution had submitted that the appeal raises no good grounds for consideration by the High Court and thus, must be dismissed.Sharjeel Imam's Challenge To Trial Court Order Denying Him BailAccording to Sharjeel Imam's appeal, the Special Court had failed to appreciate that the entire investigation was faulty and that the charge sheet attributed events to Sharjeel's speeches to incidents of violence that were not connected in any direct or indirect way to him even as per the materials relied upon in the chargesheet.The appeal also states that Sharjeel has been arrested by the investigating agency as part of a targeted campaign to have multiple FIRs and investigations against him at the same time."At the time, when the violence broke out in North East Delhi, the Appellant was already in custody in two other FIRs (FIR 22/2020 PS Crime Branch and FIR 242/2019 PS New Friends Colony) and no overt act or covert act at this time period can possibly be attributed to the Appellant in the manner sought to be done by the investigating agency," the plea reads.It has also been averred that the Trial Court failed to appreciate that there was absolutely no admissible evidence whatsoever to come to a prima facie satisfaction that Imam was part of any agreement among the co-accused persons to tum the peaceful sit- in protests/ chakka jams into communal...

SC's Verdict On Validity Of Sedition Law Will Have A Bearing: Delhi High Court Adjourns Bail Pleas Of Umar Khalid & Sharjeel Imam To May 6

Nupur Thapliyal

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Nupur Thapliyal

SC's Verdict On Validity Of Sedition Law Will Have A Bearing: Delhi High Court Adjourns Bail Pleas Of Umar Khalid & Sharjeel Imam To May 6

Nupur Thapliyal

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Nupur Thapliyal

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers