+
 
For the best experience, open
m.thewire.in
on your mobile browser or Download our App.

‘Is Organising Protest Site Enough To Attract UAPA?’: Delhi HC Asks Police

A bench of Justices Navin Chawla and Shalinder Kaur were hearing the bail pleas of the main accused in the 2020 Delhi riots case.
Justice Navin Chawla and Justice Shalinder Kaur. Illustation via Canva.
Support Free & Independent Journalism

Good morning, we need your help!

Since 2015, The Wire has fearlessly delivered independent journalism, holding truth to power.

Despite lawsuits and intimidation tactics, we persist with your support. Contribute as little as ₹ 200 a month and become a champion of free press in India.

New Delhi: “Is setting up a protest site enough for [attracting charges under] the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA)?” a bench of the Delhi high court asked the Delhi police on Wednesday.

A bench of Justices Navin Chawla and Shalinder Kaur were hearing the bail pleas of the main accused in the 2020 Delhi riots case.

“The problem is only this. Is it your case that only setting up a protest site is enough for UAPA or those protest sites resulted in violence? But the most important thing is intent under UAPA which has to be established,” the bench said.

Special public prosecutor Amit Prasad took the bench through various WhatsApp chats during the hearing to establish that the riots were planned by the accused, LiveLaw reported.

When Prasad referred to a chat between two individuals who have not been accused in the case, the bench asked why they had not been charged if the prosecution is relying on their messages.

“How can you leave these two?… and you’re relying on their messages. The conspiracy is that there are WhatsApp groups. In the WhatsApp groups, there are instigations that, let’s do this, a planning which is of a chakka jam. There is also a hint of violence there, and violence actually happens. Till then, yes, if they are involved, you may say UAPA is attracted. But when you draw attention to something like a JACT (WhatsApp group) and your own argument is that they were organising protest sites. Is that good enough?” the bench asked Prasad.

The bench directed Prasad to make a table showing which accused person was a member of a particular WhatsApp group, LiveLaw reported.

“Why we’ve been asking you all this is that come to the specific…that this man, this is what I have against him, this is why I’m saying that he was actually instigating violence, rather than having a protest,” the bench said.

The matter will continue being heard on Thursday (January 9).

The bench is hearing the bail pleas filed by Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam, Mohd. Saleem Khan, Shifa ur Rehman, Shadab Ahmed, Athar Khan, Khalid Saifi and Gulfisha Fatima. Delhi Police’s appeal against bail granted to accused Ishrat Jahan is also listed in the batch, the report said.

Make a contribution to Independent Journalism
facebook twitter