Supreme Court To Hear Umar Khalid's Bail Plea Along With His Petition Challenging UAPA Provisions On Nov 22

The Supreme Court on Tuesday (October 31) decided to hear former JNU scholar and activist Umar Khalid's plea challenging various provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, along with his pending bail application in the Delhi riots larger conspiracy case, on November 22. A bench of Justices Aniruddha Bose and Bela M Trivedi was hearing a writ petition filed by the UAPA accused under Article 32 of the Constitution. Khalid is an undertrial prisoner, who has been behind bars for over three years, since September 2020, awaiting his trial under the anti-terror law for his alleged involvement in the larger conspiracy surrounding the communal violence that broke out in February 2020 in Delhi. On the last occasion, the court tagged his plea with earlier petitions filed challenging the constitutionality of UAPA provisions. His bail application is also pending before the same bench, and was scheduled to be heard tomorrow, i.e., November 1. Right at the outset of today's hearing, the court indicated that both Khalid's pleas will have to be heard together. Justice Bose explained, "We are listing the writ petition along with the special leave petition for bail because they have overlapping implications. Other connected matters also will be taken up with these, since they are also challenges against Sections 15(1)(a) and 18 of the UAPA.""There are two provisions of the UAPA that we have challenged - one is the bail provision, and the other is the definition of unlawful activity," Advocate Prashant Bhushan, representing another petitioner, clarified. "That is there in all the petitions," Justice Trivedi replied.After Bhushan raised concerns about the delay in hearing his petition, in which notice was issued in 2021, Justice Bose assured, "We'll fix an early date."Ultimately, the bench decided to defer Umar Khalid's bail plea hearing that had been adjourned till tomorrow and hear the entire clutch of petitions, including both pleas by the former Jawaharlal Nehru University scholar, on November 22. The court also issued notice in Khalid's latest petition, as well as a writ petition filed by Foundation of Media Professionals. "In the event that any of the respondents want to file any counter-affidavit, they should file so before the next date of hearing," the judge added.BackgroundKhalid, a former scholar and researcher from Jawaharlal Nehru University, is one of the accused in the larger conspiracy case relating to the 2020 North-East Delhi communal riots case. He has been accused along with 59 others, including Pinjra Tod members Devangana Kalita and Natasha Narwal, Jamia Millia Islamia student Asif Iqbal Tanha, and student activist Gulfisha Fatima.Others who have been charge-sheeted in the case include former Congress councillor Ishrat Jahan, Jamia Coordination Committee members Safoora Zargar, Meeran Haider, and Shifa-Ur-Rehman, former Aam Aadmi Party councillor Tahir Hussain, activist Khalid Saifi, Shadab Ahmed, Tasleem Ahmed, Mohd Salim Khan, and Athar Khan.Khalid and JNU student Sharjeel Imam were the last to be charge-sheeted in the case. Zargar, Kalita, Narwal, Tanha, and Jahan have already been granted bail. Kalita, Narwhal, and Tanha were granted bail by a division bench of Justice Siddharth Mridul and Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani last year.Khalid has been booked under Sections 13, 16, 17, and 18 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, 1959, and Sections 3 and 4 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984.Last year, in October, the Delhi High Court upheld a March 2022 order of a trial court denying Khalid bail. A division bench of Justice Siddharth Mridul and Justice Rajnish Bhatnagar observed that the protests against Citizenship Amendment Act, 2019 (CAA) were geared towards the 2020 North-East Delhi riots through various ‘conspiratorial meetings’ held from December 2019 till February 2020, some of which were also attended by Khalid.In the order, the high court also took a serious view of Khalid using the words ‘inquilabli salam’ (revolutionary salute) and ‘krantikari istiqbal’ (revolutionary welcome) in a speech given in Amaravati in February 2020, considering it to be an incitement of violence. “Revolution by itself isn’t always bloodless, which is why it is contradistinctly used with the prefix - a ‘bloodless’ revolution. So, when we use the expression ‘revolution’, it is not necessarily bloodless,” the Delhi High Court observed. During the case, the bench also questioned the UAPA accused for using the world ‘jumla’ against the prime minister, remarking that there should be a ‘lakshman rekha’ for criticism.Khalid challenged the Delhi High Court’s verdict before the Supreme Court and in May of this year, a bench headed by Justice Bopanna issued notice in his plea. Earlier that month, another bench of the apex court had dismissed Delhi police’s plea against a high court order granting bail to co-accused Asif Iqbal Tanha, Natasha...

Supreme Court To Hear Umar Khalid's Bail Plea Along With His Petition Challenging UAPA Provisions On Nov 22

Awstika Das

Tags