The Supreme Court adjourned bail pleas of activists Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam and Gulfisha Fatima in the 2020 Delhi riots conspiracy case. The pleas challenge the Delhi High Court’s September 2 order denying bail under UAPA charges.
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Friday adjourned the hearing of bail pleas filed by activists Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam, Gulfisha Fatima and Meeran Haider to September 19 in the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) case. This case is linked to the alleged conspiracy behind the February 2020 riots in Delhi.
A bench of Justices Aravind Kumar and N V Anjaria informed that the matter could not be taken up immediately as it had “received the files very late.”
The four activists have approached the top court challenging the Delhi High Court’s September 2 order which had refused bail to nine people, including Khalid and Imam.
In its ruling, the high court had observed that “conspiratorial” violence carried out “under the garb of demonstrations or protests by citizens couldn’t be allowed.”
The nine people whose bail was denied by the high court were Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam, Gulfisha Fatima, Mohd Saleem Khan, Shifa Ur Rehman, Athar Khan, Meeran Haider, Abdul Khalid Saifi and Shadab Ahmed.
In a separate order on the same day, another bench of the high court also rejected the bail plea of accused Tasleem Ahmed.
The high court explained that while the Constitution gives every citizen the right to protest peacefully, such protests have to remain within legal boundaries.
The court said,
“the Constitution affords citizens the right to protest and carry out demonstrations or agitations, provided they are orderly, peaceful and without arms and such actions must be within the bounds of law.”
The bench also referred to Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution, which protects the right to free speech and expression, and observed that
“while the right to participate in peaceful protests and to make speeches in public meetings was said to have been protected under Article 19(1)(a), and couldn’t be blatantly curtailed,”
it was equally important to note that the right “was not absolute” and “subject to reasonable restrictions.”
Warning against misuse of constitutional freedoms, the high court remarked,
“if the exercise of an unfettered right to protest were permitted, it would damage the constitutional framework and impinge upon the law-and-order situation in the country.”
The accused persons, including Khalid and Imam, have been charged under the UAPA as well as several provisions of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
The prosecution has alleged that they were the “masterminds” behind the large-scale violence that broke out in northeast Delhi in February 2020.
The riots, which erupted in the backdrop of protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) and the National Register of Citizens (NRC), claimed 53 lives and left more than 700 people injured.
All the accused, however, have consistently denied the allegations made against them. They have been in jail since 2020.
Their bail pleas were first dismissed by the trial court, following which they approached the Delhi High Court. After being denied relief there too, they have now moved the Supreme Court seeking bail.
Click Here to Read Previous Reports on Delhi riots case
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
