Today, On 14th January, The Delhi High Court heard Tahir Hussain’s plea seeking interim bail to contest the upcoming assembly elections. The police opposed the plea, arguing that the right to contest elections is not a fundamental right. Hussain is accused of being the mastermind and funder of the Delhi riots. The High Court has reserved its decision on the matter.
New Delhi: The Delhi Police strongly opposed the interim bail plea of Tahir Hussain, an accused in the 2020 Delhi riots, who is seeking bail to contest and campaign in the upcoming Delhi Assembly elections.
During the proceedings in the Delhi High Court, the police indicated their willingness to grant custody parole to Hussain but could not support his release on interim bail.
The police argued that,
“The right to fight elections is not a fundamental right”
Also expressed serious concerns about the potential implications of allowing Hussain to campaign. They warned that his release could “create a threat to society” and exacerbate polarization, given the sensitive nature of the situation.
The police described Hussain as “the principal figure in the riots,” highlighting the seriousness of his involvement in the violence.
Hussain’s counsel contended that the application was solely for interim bail to file his nomination and campaign. They clarified that while Hussain was open to custody parole, interim bail was necessary for him to actively engage in the election process.
Justice Neena Bansal Krishna, who is presiding over the case, reserved her judgment after hearing the arguments and will issue an order in chambers.
During the hearing, Chetan Sharma, representing the Delhi Police, raised concerns about the potential threat to witnesses, stating,
“There’s a threat to the witnesses.”
He reiterated that “the right to fight elections is not a fundamental right,” urging the court to reject Hussain’s plea. Sharma emphasized that under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), the petitioner lacks the grounds for bail.
He cited evidence recovered from Hussain’s residence, stating,
“We are talking about 53 people dead, and the petitioner is the main person responsible.”
He warned that granting bail for a few weeks could worsen the situation and lead to further societal divisions.
The Delhi High Court previously questioned the necessity of granting interim bail to Hussain for filing his election nomination in the upcoming polls. Hussain, also an accused in the Ankit Sharma murder case, has requested bail from January 14 to February 9 to participate in the election process.
His lawyer informed the court that the nomination process has already begun, referencing the Rashid Engineer case to support his argument.
In addition to this plea, Hussain has approached the trial court for interim bail in other cases related to the Delhi riots and Enforcement Directorate investigations. Recently, the Delhi High Court issued a notice regarding Hussain’s regular bail petition concerning the murder of IB officer Ankit Sharma during the 2020 violence.
Hussain’s plea asserts that there is insufficient credible evidence against him and seeks bail based on parity. It argues that he is accused of being an instigator and co-conspirator, noting that most of the prosecution’s eyewitnesses have either not supported the case or provided unreliable testimony. The statements from police witnesses reportedly contain significant contradictions, undermining their credibility.
Read Also: HC Seeks ED Evidence for Tahir Hussain’s PMLA Case Dismissal Plea in 2020 Riots
In May, the Delhi High Court granted bail to three individuals involved in the killing of Ankit Sharma, stressing that bail is generally the rule during trial, while incarceration is the exception. The court noted that the accused had been in custody for four years, with the trial unlikely to conclude soon. An FIR was filed by Sharma’s father in February 2020 after his son went missing while out for groceries.
The Delhi Police assert that the accused were part of a violent mob responsible for Sharma’s death and were involved in rioting and arson during the clashes.
The communal violence in northeast Delhi erupted on February 24, 2020, when tensions between supporters of the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) and protesters escalated, resulting in at least 53 deaths and numerous injuries.
Case Title: Tahir Hussain v. State