The Delhi High Court Today (Dec 11) protected Mohammad Wasiq Nadeem Khan, the National Secretary of Association for Protection of Civil Rights (ACPR), from arrest in a case involving allegations of promoting enmity and criminal conspiracy. Justice Jasmeet Singh also directed that in case the Delhi Police needs his custody, they will give him seven days of advance notice in writing. “The petitioner shall not leave Delhi-NCR without the permission of the Court,” the Bench further ordered.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court on Wednesday granted protection from arrest to Mohammad Wasiq Nadeem Khan, the National Secretary of the Association for Protection of Civil Rights (ACPR), in connection with a case alleging promotion of enmity and criminal conspiracy.
Justice Jasmeet Singh presided over the hearing and issued specific directions to the Delhi Police regarding their conduct in the matter.
It was ordered that if the Delhi Police requires Khan’s custody, they must provide him with
“seven days of advance notice in writing.”
Additionally, the Court ruled that
“the petitioner shall not leave Delhi-NCR without the permission of the Court.”
The Court was deliberating on two petitions filed by Khan, which sought a stay on the investigation and the quashing of a First Information Report (FIR) that accused him of promoting enmity, disturbing public harmony, committing public mischief, and being involved in a criminal conspiracy. Earlier, the Court had already granted interim protection from arrest to Khan.
Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, representing Khan, argued that Khan has cooperated with the investigation and assured the Court that he would continue to do so. Sibal emphasized that the police, under the guise of investigation, should not harass Khan and urged for the probe to be concluded expeditiously.
Highlighting concerns about the scope of the investigation, Sibal objected to the police’s demand for access to Khan’s phone, stating that the police intended
“to check everything that I (Khan) have done in my life.”
The Court acknowledged the merit in this concern but maintained that the police have the right to investigate.
Justice Singh observed,
“They are entitled to investigate. They are investigating. Your right to liberty is protected, you are not being arrested.”
Delhi Police assured the Court that Khan would not be arrested and that in the event custodial interrogation is required, advance notice will be served. The Court also quashed a previously issued non-bailable warrant against Khan, noting his compliance with the investigation.
Khan was summoned by the Delhi Police in connection with a video shared on social media related to an exhibition held by ACPR in Hyderabad. The video reportedly featured an individual standing in front of display boards and discussing issues involving “Nadeem, Akhlaq, Rohit Vemula, Pehlu Khan,” along with references to the 2020 CAA/NRC protests at Shaheen Bagh and the Delhi riots. The FIR alleged that the video depicted a specific community as victims, potentially inciting unrest.
The police investigation identified that the stall in the video was set up by ACPR, and the individual featured was Khan. However, Khan defended the video, asserting that its theme centered around minority rights, hate speech, and discrimination. He claimed his statements were in alignment with his fundamental rights to free speech under Article 19 of the Indian Constitution.
In his plea, Khan argued that he had not made any false statements or comments in the video that could incite disharmony. He added that the FIR did not reference any offenses punishable by more than three years of imprisonment. Khan also pointed out that no adverse incidents or complaints had arisen from the video, making the FIR baseless.
Khan was represented by a team of legal experts, including Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal and advocates Tara Narula, Tamanna Pankaj, Shivangi Sharma, Ahmed Ibrahim, Rupali Samuel, Shahrukh Alam, Deeksha Dwivedi, and Ritesh Dhar Dubey.
On behalf of the Delhi Police, Standing Counsel Sanjay Lao and Additional Standing Counsel Sanjeev Bhandari appeared in the Court.
PREVIOUSLY IN DELHI HC
The Delhi High Court, on Friday (Dec 6), called for a response from the Delhi Police regarding a plea filed by Mohammad Wasiq Nadeem Khan, the National Secretary of the Association for Protection of Civil Rights (APCR). Khan’s petition seeks the quashing of non-bailable warrants issued against him by the Saket court.
Justice Jasmeet Singh issued a notice to the Delhi Police and scheduled the case for further consideration on December 11.
The non-bailable warrant against Khan stems from allegations linking him to charges of promoting enmity and engaging in criminal conspiracy.
These charges followed the viral circulation of a YouTube video featuring him. In the video, Khan was seen at an exhibition stall, standing near multiple display boards.
According to the First Information Report (FIR), he was seen gesturing toward a banner while mentioning names like “Nadeem, Akhlaq, Rohit Vemula, Pehlu Khan,” alongside references to the 2020 CAA/NRC protests at Shaheen Bagh and the Delhi riots. The video allegedly portrayed a particular community as victims and incited public sentiment.
Upon analysis, the Delhi Police identified the stall in the video as belonging to APCR, with Khan as the person depicted in it. Consequently, an FIR was filed against him on November 30, citing offenses related to promoting enmity, acts prejudicial to harmony, public mischief, and criminal conspiracy.
On December 2, the Delhi Police obtained a non-bailable warrant against Khan. However, Khan’s petition before the High Court claims that the warrant was issued hastily and without any valid grounds.
“It is settled law that a non-bailable warrant cannot be issued in aid of investigation, and the proper course to be adopted is first, issuance of summons, thereafter bailable warrants, and only thereafter, non-bailable warrant,”
-the petition stated.
Khan argued that the issuance of the non-bailable warrant in his case reflected a lack of due consideration and was a departure from established legal procedures.
Click Here to Read Previous Reports on Nadeem Khan
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
