Today, On 6th December, Umar Khalid, arrested in September 2020 by the Delhi Police, informed the Delhi High Court that no allegations of violence had been made against him. He emphasized that his speech referenced Gandhian principles. Khalid has remained in custody since his arrest, facing charges linked to the Delhi riots. His statement highlights the peaceful intent of his actions.
New Delhi: Umar Khalid, an accused in the 2020 Delhi riots conspiracy case, argued before the Delhi High Court on Friday that there are no allegations of violence or fund-raising against him.
Khalid’s lawyer, Senior Advocate Trideep Pais, presented his case before the Division Bench of Justices Navin Chawla and Shalinder Kaur, concluding his arguments today. He asserted that, similar to other defendants in the case, Khalid is seeking bail due to his prolonged incarceration as an undertrial.
Read Also: Umar Khalid’s UAPA Case| Delhi Court Reserves Order on Bail Plea
Pais emphasized Khalid’s position by stating,
“No recovery whatsoever from me or at my instance by way of disclosure. There is no mention of me in the FIRs [of 2020] related to violence. No physical evidence has been retrieved from me or anyone else to demonstrate my involvement in any violence. There are no allegations of procurement, receipt, or raising of funds, nor any claims of terrorist acts or violent actions on my part. The only FIR [related to violence] in which I was implicated has led to my discharge.”
Pais argued that the only overt act attributed to Khalid was a speech he delivered in Amravati, Maharashtra.
He stated,
“It does not call for violence. I was thousands of miles away from Delhi. There was no reaction from the crowd. It was a speech invoking Gandhian principles of non-violence, urging protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act.”
He noted that no one paid attention to the full speech; instead, the prosecution relied on a selective clip that served a political agenda.
Regarding the WhatsApp conversations cited as evidence by the Delhi Police, Pais mentioned he was part of three groups but had not sent any messages in two of them.
He clarified his involvement in the third group, stating,
“I only shared the location of a protest site when someone asked for it.”
He also recounted a call from a senior Delhi Police officer while he was in Bihar, who requested him to call off a protest at the police headquarters due to security concerns related to President Donald Trump’s visit to Delhi.
Pais added,
“I shared this message on the group,”
On the alleged conspiracy meetings, he argued that participants were not even in the same location, stating,
“They are randomly reading call detail records and comparing the locations of accused individuals.”
He pointed out that other attendees, such as activist Yogendra Yadav, were not charged, highlighting that there were allegations of participation in meetings but no accusations of criminality.
He asserted,
“The three statements that reference the meeting do not indicate any preparation for violence,”
Addressing the claim that the meeting was secretive, he noted that photos were posted on Facebook, indicating nothing clandestine about it. He also mentioned that co-accused who attended the meeting had already been granted bail.
Pais further argued that the prosecution’s assertion of numerous calls among group members does not clarify the content of those conversations.
He said,
“Many people made calls; some were charged, while others were not,”
Khalid arrested in September 2020 and faces charges of criminal conspiracy, rioting, and unlawful assembly, among others under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA).
Read Also: Umar Khalid Seeks Bail in North East Delhi Violence Case
He has been in custody since then and is now seeking bail for the second time after a trial court denied his request in March 2022. His subsequent appeal to the High Court was also denied in October 2022, leading him to approach the Supreme Court.
In May 2023, the Supreme Court requested a response from the Delhi Police regarding the matter. Khalid’s plea was adjourned 14 times before he withdrew it on February 14, 2024, due to a change in circumstances. His counsel, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, stated,
“We wish to withdraw due to a change of circumstances and move the trial court for appropriate relief.”
The trial court later rejected his second bail petition on May 28, prompting the current appeal to the High Court.