A Delhi court granted bail to nine Indian Youth Congress activists arrested during the India AI Impact Summit protest, calling their act “political dissent” and not organised crime. The Court stressed that pre-trial detention without necessity violates Article 21 and that bail remains the rule, not jail.
A Delhi court on Sunday evening granted bail to nine members of the Indian Youth Congress (IYC) who were arrested by the Delhi Police in connection with protests held during the India AI Impact Summit at Bharat Mandapam.
The bail order was passed by Judicial Magistrate First Class (JMFC) Ravi at the Patiala House Court. The court directed the release of Krishna Hari, Narshimha Yadav, Kundan Kumar Yadav, Ajay Kumar Singh, Jitendra Singh Yadav, Raja Gurjar, Ajay Kumar Vimal @ Bantu, Saurabh Singh and Arbaz Khan.
In a detailed and strongly worded order, the Court made it clear that the protest by the Youth Congress activists was an act of political dissent and not a criminal conspiracy or violent act. The judge observed that the protest did not amount to any serious offence or organised wrongdoing.
The Court clearly stated that the Youth Congress’ protest amounted to “political dissent”, not “recidivist violence or organised crime.”
Explaining the nature of the protest, the judge noted,
“The protest, at highest, constituted symbolic political critique during, a public event: T-shirts with leadership imagery, non-inciteful slogans bereft of communal/regional taint, and transient assembly. No evidence discloses property defacement, or delegate panic; exit was orderly via escort,”
the Court noted.
The case relates to a protest staged by members of the Indian Youth Congress inside the India AI Impact Summit held at Bharat Mandapam on February 20. During the event, some activists removed their shirts to reveal T-shirts carrying slogans such as “PM is compromised” and messages criticising the India-US trade deal. They also raised slogans against Prime Minister Narendra Modi and certain government policies.
The Delhi Police arrested fourteen persons in connection with the protest, alleging that they breached security arrangements at the high-profile international event and shouted alleged “anti-national” slogans.
However, while considering the bail plea, the Court emphasised the importance of personal liberty under the Constitution. Judge Ravi observed that keeping the accused in custody without strong reasons would violate their fundamental rights.
The judge stated that prolonged pre-trial detention, bereft of any investigative necessity violates the right to liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution.
The Court also pointed out that none of the offences invoked against the accused carry a punishment of more than seven years of imprisonment. It rejected the argument of the Delhi Police that the sentences could be added together and run consecutively to justify continued custody.
Rejecting the prosecution’s reasoning, the Court remarked that the police’s argument was
“bereft of jurisprudential moorings at this interlocutory bail juncture, where the judicial gaze is riveted not on the mirage of potential conviction but on the stark realities of pre-trial liberty”.
The judge further made a strong observation on the principle of bail and liberty, stating,
“Pre-trial detention, severed from any imperative necessity and devoid of persisting investigative demands, ineluctably devolves into an illicit premptive punishment antecedent to conviction – a profound aberration fundamentally a t odds with the bedrock axioms of criminal jurisprudence, which exalt liberty as the governing norm and incarceration as the narrowly circumscribed exception,”
the Judge added.
The Court also reiterated its view on the character of the protest by observing,
“The protest constituted symbolic political critique during a public event; T-shirts with leadership imagery, non-inciteful slogans bereft of communal/regional taint.”
During the hearing, the prosecution argued that the protest had the potential to affect national security, international relations and national integrity because it disrupted a major global event. The State also submitted that the investigation was still ongoing and there was a possibility that the accused might tamper with evidence if released.
On the other hand, the lawyers appearing for the activists argued that all the alleged offences fall in Category A as per the Supreme Court’s guidelines in Satender Kumar Antil, where bail is considered the rule and jail is the exception.
They contended that the protest was peaceful and amounted to symbolic political dissent protected under Articles 19(1)(a) and 19(1)(b) of the Constitution of India. They further submitted that there was no violence, damage to property or real threat caused by the protest.
After examining the case records and hearing both sides, the Court concluded that continued custody was not necessary and ordered the release of the nine activists on bail.
ALSO READ: BREAKING| AI Impact Summit Protest: Bail Granted to IYC Chief Uday Bhanu Chib
Senior Advocate Tanveer Ahmed Mir appeared for the IYC activists along with advocates Roopesh Singh Bhadauria, Chitwan Godara, Rishav Ranjan, Aman Prasad, Vivek Punia, Sumit Rawat, Keshav Nagi, Litesh Batra, Maroof Khan, Kashif Ahmad Khan, Prakhar Vashisth and Amrit Yadav. The Delhi Police was represented by Additional Public Prosecutors Atul Srivastava and Kartikey Sharma.
The order is significant as it highlights the balance between maintaining public order and protecting the fundamental right to protest and personal liberty under the Constitution.
Click Here to Read More Reports on AI Summit
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
