Northeast Delhi violence: Delhi HC reserves order on bail plea of Umar Khalid in larger conspiracy case

New Delhi [India], September 9 : The Delhi High Court on Friday reserved the order on the bail plea of Umar Khalid in Northeast Delhi violence larger conspiracy case.
Umar Khalid is an accused in a larger conspiracy related to the Northeast Delhi violence of February 2020.
Former Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) student leader Umar Khalid has challenged the order of a trial court denying him bail in the case in March this year. He was booked under stringent anti-terror law UAPA by Delhi police and arrested on September 13, 2020.
The special division bench of justices Sidharth Mridul and Rajanish Bhatnagar after hearing the rebuttal arguments by senior advocate Tridip Pais for Umar Khalid reserved the verdict.
The bench granted Pais two days' time to file written submissions. The bench will hear the bail plea of Sharjeel Imam from September 23 onwards.
Senior advocate Tridip Pais during his rebuttal arguments submitted that there was no meeting of minds and agreement between two more persons to do a criminal act, which is an essential element of criminal conspiracy. Independent acts of different individuals do not amount to conspiracy.
Pais also submitted that the speech of one co-accused and mine had reference to Triple Talaq, Kashmir issue and others. But at the heart of it was the opposition to CAA. This is the component. Is the opposition to the law on Triple Talaq, CAA or the abrogation of Article 370 from Jammu and Kashmir illegal in itself? There are several, even former judges, who expressed their views against these laws.
He was referring to the allegations that the essence of the speeches of Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam was to create fear in the mind of Muslims.
Senior advocate Pais also submitted that there was no proof that the women who were allegedly transported to Jafrabad were Bangladeshi. Travelling on a bus is not a criminal act, he argued.
The senior advocate for Umar Khalid submitted that during the riots he not was present in Delhi and no recoveries have been made from him. In this case, the test of Kehar Singh is not met.
In relation to Amaravati speech, he submitted that there was not a single incident of violence after it. He also said advocating a chakka jam to raise an issue does not make his act criminal.
There was a call from him for a non violent protest during the visit of Trump to show the highest officer of the superpower to show the injustice towards muslims, submitted by the senior advocate.
He also raised a question on the reliability of protected witnesses and the statement of Tariq Anwar on the point of Amaravati speech. He said there are contradictions in the statement of witnesses.
Tridip Pais also confronted the arguments of Special Public Prosecutor (SPP) Amit Prasad on the point of the statement of witnesses on the point of alleged meeting of Umar Khalid, Tahir Hussain and Khalid Saifi in Shaheen bagh. He said there is no confirmation in which office the meeting was held.
The senior advocate submitted that his client has been in custody for the last two years on the basis of a baseless statement. Even after the filing of four chargesheet, an investigation is still going on. He argued there is an allegation of giving a provocative speech at Seelampur. No witness has stated what was provocative in the speech.
On the last date of hearing Delhi police had submitted Umar Khalid had left Delhi on February 23 before the violence started the next day so that no one could doubt him, argued Delhi police while concluding the arguments opposing his bail plea.
Earlier Amit Prasad had argued that Umar Khalid in his speech at Amravati had asked the people to be on road for chakka jam on February 24, 2020. He had said that it was to show Trump that CAA was a dangerous Act for Muslims.
Senior Advocate Tridip Pais argued that there is no material, no basis of allegations in the charge sheet. It is based on hearsay.
During the argument on May 23, 2022, he argued that Sharjeel Imam had criticized a secular movement against the Citizenship (Amendment) Act and Khalid disagreed.
Pais had said, "I am (Umar Khalid) being lumped with a person who calls for a deeply communal protest against CAA. There is no ideological meeting of minds."