Delhi Riots UAPA Case | Trial Can Be Completed In 2 Years If Accused Cooperate : Police Tell Supreme Court

The Delhi police on Friday (November 21) told the Supreme Court that the trial in the riots larger conspiracy case - in which Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam, Gulfisha Fatima etc., are booked under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act -can be completed within two years if the accused cooperate."I can finish the trial in 2 years, provided they cooperate," Additional Solicitor General SV Raju, for the Delhi Police, told a bench comprising Justice Aravind Kumar and Justice NV Anjaria.The bench is hearing the bail petitions filed by Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam, Gulfisha Fatima, Meeran Haider, Shifa Ur Rehman, Mohd Saleem Khan, and Shadab Ahmad. During the hearing, the ASG said that the delay in the trial is caused by the accused themselves, and stated that they have not completed the arguments on charge yet.Today, the ASG took the bench through the counter-affidavit filed by the Delhi Police detailing the evidence against the accused. Referring to the speeches of Sharjeel Imam to block the 'chicken neck' area of India to isolate Assam from the mainland, Raju said that it attracted the offence of 'terrorism' as defined under Section 15 of the UAPA. The speeches inciting the disruption of economic supplies also attract Section 15. Yesterday, the ASG had played the clips of Imam's speeches in the Court.With respect to Umar Khalid, the ASG said that there was an earlier case against him for the "Bharat tere tukde-tukde hoge" speech. He called Khalid a "veteran of sedition" and said that he had formed WhatsApp groups only with Muslim students for riots. The ASG narrated the averments in the counter-affidavit regarding the alleged larger conspiracy behind the Delhi riots.The ASG alleged that other accused such as Tahir Hussain, Meeran Haider, Shifa ur Rehman, and Gulfisha Fatima were involved in raising finances for the criminal acts. He added that the ED is investigating the money trail.He submitted that as per Section 10 of the Evidence Act, any statement or act done by some members of a conspiracy in furtherance of the common intention is relevant evidence against the other conspirators too. "Anything done in the conspiracy period, he/she would be vicariously liable-principle of agency will apply," ASG said.ASG also argued that delay in the trial by itself is not a ground for bail in UAPA offences."This is a clear case where UAPA offences are attracted, conspiracy to commit terrorist act, murder, etc is made out, and it was not simple dharna for CAA, it was for regime change. All those who went for dharna carried sticks, acid bottles, and coincided with Donald Trump's visit- they wanted regime change like in Bangladesh and Nepal. They have scant regards to the constitution. If 43D(5) is covered, bail is not to be granted," ASG said.The arguments will continue on Monday.Yesterday, the Delhi Police, through the ASG, submitted that there is a narrative built outside the Court that these persons are "intellectual" but they are educated terrorists, dangerous to society. Raju stated that these were not spontaneous protests but a well-planned conspiracy, referring to the various WhatsApp groups, Delhi Protest Support Group (DPSG), Jamia Awareness Campaign Team, and claimed that the intention was "regime change" and "economic strangulation".He played a video which contained various snippets of the provocative speeches by Imam, in which he is heard saying as chakka-jams must be held in all Indian cities, Muslims must unite to cut off the 'chicken neck' area connecting India to Assam and cut-off north-east from the mainland, must disrupt supplies of essentials to Delhi, must paralyse the Government, and that the Courts cannot be trusted. Senior Advocate Siddharth Dave responded that selective parts of the speeches have been put together to set a narrative. The Court was informed that all these speeches are a part of the chargesheet. Earlier, the Delhi Police argued that Umar Khalid cannot claim parity with Devangana Kalita, Natasha Narwal and Asif Iqbal Tanha, the co-accused in the Delhi riots larger conspiracy case, as the 2021 order of the Delhi High Court giving them bail was passed on an incorrect interpretation of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA).Before the ASG, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta had briefly addressed the bench, arguing that the public statements of the accused reflect a pre-planned conspiracy to attack the sovereignty of the nation. The petitioners mostly argued on the delay and the unlikelihood of the commencement of the trial. Senior Advocate Dr Abhishek Manu Singhvi (for Gulfisha Fatima), Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal (for Umar Khalid, and Senior Advocate Siddharth Dave (for Sharjeel Imam) argued that there is no proof of violence that they instigated the riots even after five years have passed. The Special Leave Petitions are filed against the September 2 judgment of the Delhi High Court which dismissed their bail pleas. The petitioners have been in custody for over five years.The...

Delhi Riots UAPA Case | Trial Can Be Completed In 2 Years If Accused Cooperate : Police Tell Supreme Court

Gursimran Kaur Bakshi

Tags