The Delhi High Court dismissed Shifa-ur-Rehman’s bail plea, rejecting his claim of being the family’s sole breadwinner. The court cited his alleged misuse of position, handling of funds, and involvement in the 2020 riots conspiracy as too serious to overlook.
New Delhi: The Delhi High Court on Tuesday refused to grant bail to Shifa-ur-Rehman, who is facing trial in the Delhi riots larger conspiracy case. Rehman, who is also the President of the Alumni Association of Jamia Millia Islamia (AAJMI), had argued that he should be released because he is the only earning member of his family.
However, the Court rejected this plea, holding that his alleged misuse of position, handling of funds, and role in the 2020 conspiracy were too serious to be overlooked.
A Division Bench of Justices Navin Chawla and Shalinder Kaur was hearing Rehman’s appeal against the trial court order that had already denied him bail. According to the prosecution, Rehman took advantage of his position as AAJMI president and arranged funds amounting to nearly ₹8.90 lakh for the riots.
Fake bills were allegedly generated in the name of AAJMI to hide the real expenses. These documents were later recovered from the AAJMI office on April 28, 2020, at Rehman’s instance.
Investigators claimed the recovery showed that AAJMI had received around ₹7–8 lakh in cash.
The prosecution further alleged that Rehman collected and distributed money to involve women and children in protests, knowing that the police would hesitate to use force against them.
Supporting its case, the Special Public Prosecutor told the Court that these funds were not for social activities but
“were intended to aid riots and sustain the fight against CAA/NRC,” and that “fake bills were generated to adjust the money used in furtherance of the conspiracy.”
The Court, while recording the material placed before it, observed:
“We have perused the aforesaid statements, and the material placed on record. It is the case of the prosecution that the Appellants played the role assigned to them in furtherance of the alleged larger conspiracy, who were managing various protest sites across Delhi and had allegedly attended various meetings of the JCC at the AAJMI Office and other venues.”
Rehman’s lawyer countered these allegations, arguing that the basic conditions of a “terrorist act” or “conspiracy” under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) were not met.
He stressed that no weapons were recovered, charges had not yet been framed, and his client had already spent a long time in custody.
The defense also highlighted Rehman’s personal situation, stating that he is the sole provider for his elderly mother, disabled brother, two unmarried sisters, wife, and two young children, and that his prolonged imprisonment was causing serious suffering to the family.
His counsel also sought bail on the ground of parity with co-accused such as Asif Iqbal Tanha, Devangana Kalita, and Natasha Narwal, who were granted bail earlier.
Rejecting these arguments, the Court said:
“In our view, the possibility of misuse of position by the Appellant Shifa-ur-Rehman, being the President of AAJMI, cannot be ruled out at this stage. More so, when certain bills were allegedly recovered by the prosecution from the AAJMI’s office. It is further alleged that the said organisation had received a total amount of Rs. 7–8 lakhs in cash. The Appellants are stated to have been in charge of more than eight protest sites in Delhi NCR. Appellant Meeran Haider is also alleged to have spent Rs. 2.33 lakhs on riots and protest sites.”
The Court further noted that Rehman and fellow accused Meeran Haider appeared to be working in close coordination. Their alleged role in raising funds was treated as a very serious element that could not be dismissed at this point. On the question of parity with other accused, the Bench remarked:
“We are of the view that the position and role of the present Appellants in the alleged conspiracy is placed differently than the co-accused persons in the entire sequence of events, allegedly being among the fundraisers in the conspiracy.”
Apart from Rehman, nearly seventeen people have been named as accused in this case. The Delhi Police’s Special Cell registered FIR 59 of 2020, listing several well-known names, including Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam, Tahir Hussain, Khalid Saifi, Ishrat Jahan, Meeran Haider, and Gulfisha Fatima.
The charges against them include tough provisions under the UAPA as well as Indian Penal Code sections on criminal conspiracy, promoting enmity, rioting, and murder.
The violence, which broke out in Northeast Delhi in February 2020 during protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), claimed 53 lives and left thousands injured.
According to the prosecution, this violence was not a sudden flare-up but a pre-planned conspiracy aimed at destabilizing the government during a politically charged time. It has alleged that Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam were the masterminds behind the conspiracy.
The accused, however, strongly deny this, saying they were only exercising their democratic right to protest against the CAA.
The trial court proceedings in this case are still continuing and are currently at the stage of hearing arguments on the charges.
Case Title:
Sharjeel Imam vs State and other connected matters.
Read Order:
Click Here to Read Previous Reports on Delhi Riots case
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
