Today, 24th April, During Umar Khalid’s bail hearing, his counsel argued that no case of terrorism has been established against him. The defense emphasized the need for a fair and evidence-based legal process in the matter. Khalid’s supporters have reiterated calls for justice and due diligence in handling the case.
New Delhi: Umar Khalid’s lawyer contended in court on Wednesday that the allegations against the former Jawaharlal Nehru University student leader do not constitute a terrorism offense. The attorney emphasized that merely repeating Khalid’s name in the Delhi Police’s charge sheet does not substantiate the accusations.
Also highlighting the aggressive media scrutiny faced by Khalid,the lawyer stated,
“Repeating his name does not turn a falsehood into a truth,”
The bail request of Umar Khalid, the former student leader from Jawaharlal Nehru University, currently under consideration by the courts. He faces charges in a significant conspiracy case connected to the 2020 Delhi riots, with allegations framed under the stringent anti-terrorism legislation, UAPA (Unlawful Activities Prevention Act).
During a recent session at the Karkardooma Court, Special Judge Sameer Bajpai listened to the arguments presented by Senior Advocate Tridip Pais on behalf of Khalid. The judge allowed a ten-day period for the submission of written arguments, scheduling the next hearing for May 7.
The charges against Khalid by the Delhi Police suggest that he orchestrated protests at 23 different sites in 2020, which eventually escalated into violent riots. After initially approaching the Supreme Court for bail in February, Khalid later withdrew his plea and sought relief from the trial court instead. He argues that there have been changes in the circumstances surrounding his case and seeks bail on the basis of parity, noting that other accused individuals in the same case have been granted bail.
Senior advocate Tridip Pais challenged the Delhi police’s submissions by asking,
“Is the act of sharing messages deemed a criminal or terrorist activity?”
In response to the arguments presented by the Special Public Prosecutor (SPP), who suggested that Umar Khalid disseminating a conspiratorial narrative by sharing certain links with political figures and others on social media, Khalid’s lawyer, Senior Advocate Tridip Pais, contended that Khalid in fact promoting the ‘correct narrative.’ Pais challenged the claim, emphasizing that the narrative shared by Khalid aimed at presenting factual information.
Furthermore, Pais addressed the issue of media bias, arguing that there was a hostile media trial against Umar Khalid. He pointed out how various news anchors constantly broadcasting allegations from the charge sheet against Khalid, suggesting a prejudicial media environment.
Indicating the extent of the media scrutiny, Pais highlighted,
“Anchors were reading from the charge sheet around the clock,”
Pais also argued vigorously against the framing of the charges, asserting that,
“No terror case is made against Umar Khalid, and the police have no material to substantiate such a claim.”
Read Also:Umar Khalid Bail Plea Adjourned
He urged the court to critically assess whether the allegations meet the threshold of a terror case. Additionally, Pais pointed out inconsistencies in the statements of prosecution witnesses, which further complicates the prosecution’s case.
He urged the court to scrutinize whether the statements of the witnesses alone could prima facie constitute a terror case against Khalid. Pais also referenced a previous court decision where the High Court granted bail to Natasha Narwal, Devangana Kalita, and Asif Iqbal Tanha, who implicated under similar circumstances as Khalid, highlighting the need for consistency and fairness in judicial proceedings.
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
