Delhi High Court has reserved its verdict on bail pleas of activists Sharjeel Imam and Umar Khalid in the UAPA case linked to the alleged pre-planned conspiracy behind the February 2020 Delhi riots.
New Delhi: On July 9, the Delhi High Court today heard extensive arguments by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta in the bail plea hearings of Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam, accused in the Delhi Riots conspiracy case.
The matter, listed as Shadab Ahmed v. State of NCT of Delhi (CRL.A. 600/2022), was heard by a division bench comprising Hon’ble Mr. Justice Navin Chawla and Hon’ble Ms. Justice Shalinder Kaur.
ALSO READ: Transferred Judge Returns to Hear 2020 Delhi Riots UAPA Conspiracy Case from July 1
Appearing for the prosecution, SG Tushar Mehta submitted a strong opposition to the grant of bail to Khalid and Imam.
He began by asserting that
“This isn’t just a routine bail matter. We’re dealing with a meticulously planned and coordinated riot that erupted in the capital at a specific time and date.”
He emphasized that the alleged events were not spontaneous acts of protest but part of a wider, deliberate conspiracy.
Further strengthening his argument, the Solicitor General stated,
“Imam and Khalid chose that day to malign India internationally. I’ll present documents to show this isn’t an ordinary bail case. The planned and coordinated actions leave no basis for bail. When such large-scale acts are committed against the nation, there is no entitlement to bail.”
He maintained that the evidence pointed to a calculated attempt to damage India’s image.
SG Mehta underlined the thoroughness of the police investigation, stating,
“This is one of the most thorough investigations I’ve seen 58 statements recorded under Section 164 to satisfy the court’s conscience. Unlike usual spontaneous riots, this was pre-planned with a sinister agenda, making the accused ineligible for discretionary bail.”
He accused the duo of orchestrating a misleading campaign that spread fear and unrest among people about losing their citizenship.
He argued,
“A false narrative was spread that citizenship would be taken away this planned campaign began with them. Now it’s being said ‘intellectuals’ are jailed; I’ll show what they were actually doing. Umar Khalid’s speech spoke of stockpiling weapons like powder and broken bottles, saying ‘You will be told when the riots will begin.’”
SG Mehta also claimed that the intention behind these acts was to attract international attention and defame the country:
“The intention was that global media takes a note on this and the country is defamed globally.”
He added that the accused were allegedly part of a WhatsApp group where the conspiracy was being coordinated:
“They are all in a WhatsApp group and the conspiracy is going on there.”
Further, the Solicitor General linked the timing of the riots to a high-profile international visit:
“There was a clear and deliberate intent to embarrass India during the visit of a foreign President. In a chat, they say, ‘Trump will be in Delhi on 24th-25th February. Can we do something that will affect Delhi?’ referring to Delhi as if it’s a foreign land.”
He drew a distinction between legitimate protests and violent action:
“The road block was an instrument during fight for independence also but not with the intention of creating riots and getting people killed. This was not a spontaneous riot but rather a well orchestrated well planned one.”
He also mentioned efforts by the accused to destroy evidence:
“They also planned to break or cover the CCTV.”
Highlighting the weapons used, SG Mehta revealed alarming details:
“Referring to a ‘gulel’ used to launch acid, bottles, stones, bricks, and petrol bombs. Some whistleblowers initially joined believing it was just a protest, not an act of terrorism.”
Summing up his arguments, he said:
“It is a case of pre meditated act to hamper the sovereignty of the nation.”
He also addressed concerns over delay in the trial by stating:
“While speedy trial is a right but cases like these comprising of anti national activities with an intention to divide the nation should be treated differently.” He concluded his submissions thereafter.
He rejected the argument that long incarceration without trial could justify bail, especially in cases of national security. Emphasizing the seriousness of the matter, he said,
“In cases involving anti-national activities, long incarceration is not a factor. This is an attack on the sovereignty of the country. By attacking the national capital, it would have effect on the entire country. If you are doing something against the nation, you better be in jail.”
Pointing to the organized nature of the events, Mehta said,
“We are dealing with a well-orchestrated, well-thought, well-organised criminal conspiracy that starts at the capital of the country for all-India impact. This is not like any other riots case in the country. One of their intention was to globally defame our nation by choosing a particular day for more arson, more rioting.”
He criticized certain sections of civil society for playing a divisive role, asserting,
“I want to show what the ‘intellectuals’ are doing, dividing the nation on religious lines.”
Referring to Sharjeel Imam’s alleged speech, Mehta claimed that there was a pre-decided “four weeks” timeline to execute the conspiracy.
He also cited coverage by international media outlets like The Guardian to argue that the intent was to bring global disrepute to India.
Following his arguments, the Court reserved its verdict in all bail applications, except the one filed by co-accused Shadab Ahmed.
In Ahmed’s case, Delhi Police Standing Counsel Amit Prasad is still presenting his arguments. The hearing in Shadab Ahmed’s matter will resume tomorrow at 4:30 PM.
Case title:
Shadab Ahmed v. State of NCT of Delhi (CRL.A. 600/2022)
Click Here to Read More Reports On Delhi riots
