Umar Khalid seeks bail, says no proof connects him to 2020 Delhi riots
Activist Umar Khalid told the Supreme Court there is no evidence linking him to the 2020 Delhi riots, denying conspiracy charges under UAPA. His counsel argued for bail on parity grounds as the hearing, also involving others, remains inconclusive
New Delhi: Seeking bail in the UAPA case linked to February 2020 riots in Delhi, activist Umar Khalid on Friday told the Supreme Court that there is no evidence linking him to violence and denied conspiracy charges against him.
Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Khalid, told a bench of Justices Aravind Kumar and N V Anjaria that there has been no recovery of funds, weapons or any material evidence linking him to the 2020 Delhi riots.
“There are 751 FIRs, I am charged in one, and if it’s a conspiracy, it’s a bit surprising! “If I (Umar Khalid) conspired riots. On dates in which riots took place, I was not in Delhi,” Sibal said and added that no funds, weapons and physical evidence connecting me to violence have been found yet.
“No witness statement actually connects petitioner to any act of violence,” he pointed out. Sibal submitted that Khalid is entitled to bail on grounds of parity, noting that fellow activists Natasha Narwal, Devangana Kalita and Asif Iqbal Tanha were granted bail in June 2021.
Sibal said that the Delhi High Court, while denying bail, had termed Umar Khalid’s speech at Amravati on February 17, 2020, as “inflammatory.” “It is available on YouTube. It was a public speech where I (Khalid) spoke about Gandhian principles,” Sibal added.
Senior advocate Abhishek Singhvi, appearing for Gulfisha Fatima, argued that she has been in jail for five years and five months since April 2020.
Singhvi pointed out that while the main chargesheet was filed on September 16, 2020, the prosecution has made it an “annual ritual” to file supplementary chargesheets every year.
He submitted that there has been an inordinate delay in the consideration of the bail plea of Fatima, which has been listed over 90 times since 2020.
Singhvi stated that the allegation against his client is merely that she created a WhatsApp group to coordinate or mobilise support. “But the real test in law, as laid down by the Supreme Court, is whether there was any intent to incite violence or create disharmony,” he said.
Senior advocate Siddharth Dave, appearing for Sharjeel Imam, submitted that the police took three years to complete its investigation. “Out of the five years I have spent in custody, three went by because the probe was still ongoing. “The speeches were delivered by me (Imam) nearly two months before the riots,” Dave said and argued that there is no direct or proximate link to suggest that he could have incited the violence.
The hearing remained inconclusive and will continue on November 3. The Delhi Police on Thursday opposed the bail pleas of activists, saying that they conspired to strike at the sovereignty and integrity of the country by a “regime change operation” executed under the guise of “peaceful protest”.
Khalid, Imam, Gulfisha Fatima and Meeran Haider were booked under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) and provisions of the erstwhile IPC for allegedly being the “masterminds” of the February 2020 riots, which left 53 people dead and over 700 injured.
The violence erupted during the protests against the Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA) and the National Register of Citizens (NRC).
