Breaking: Delhi Court Denies Interim Bail To Sharjeel Imam In Sedition Case

A Delhi Court on Saturday denied interim bail to Sharjeel Imam in FIR 22/2020 relating to the alleged inflammatory speeches made by him in Aligarh Muslim University and Jamia area in Delhi against the Citizenship Amendment Act.

The interim bail plea was moved by Sharjeel Imam in an FIR against him involving the offence of Sedition under sec. 124A of Indian Penal Code, in view of recent Apex Court order wherein the sedition law has been kept in abeyance till the Union Government reconsiders the provision.

Additional Sessions Judge Amitabh Rawat of the Karkardooma Courts observed that there cannot be another bail application by Imam and another arguments on the merits of the bail application, when the Court has already passed the order denying him regular bail as well as framing of charges against him on merits.

LThus, there can only be one bail order on the merits of the case and this Court cannot again pass an order on the merits that too in an interim bail application. Otherwise, by this logic, there can be two bail orders on merits of the case at the same time passed by this Court. The merits of the case cannot be agitated again in an interim bail application in view of the disposal of the previous bail application and orders on charge both dated 24.01.2022," the Court said.

On the point of continuation of trial, the Court said saif that in view of the Supreme Court order, the pending trials with respect to the charges framed under sec. 124A IPC have been kept in abeyance; however, adjudication with respect to other Sections can proceed if the court is of the opinion that no prejudice would be caused to the accused.

"Thus, there is no total embargo on continuance of trial in a case involving various offences including Section 124A IPC. In the present case, the trial is continuing against accused Sharjeel Imam not only in respect of offence under Section 124A IPC but also for the offence under Section 153A IPC, 153B IPC, 505 IPC & 13 UAPA," it added.

This came after the High Court had granted liberty to Imam to approach the Trial Court seeking interim bail after the prosecution raised a preliminary objection on the maintainability of the interim bail application before the High Court, submitting that according to a 2014 Supreme Court ruling, the bail application has to be moved in the first instance before the Special Court and if aggrieved, an appeal would thereafter lie before the High Court.

"In view of the Hon'ble Supreme Court's directions, the hindrance raised by this Ld. Special Court in the impugned order stands obviated, and observations surrounding the offence under section 124-A IPC cannot be taken into consideration in the proceedings against the Petitioner pending the final outcome of the Constitutional challenges to the section," the plea stated.

The plea added that Imam had been incarcerated for nearly 28 months whereas the maximum punishment for the offences, not including 124-A IPC, are punishable upto a maximum 7 years of imprisonment.

"That the Petitioner meets the proverbial 'triple test for bail. Moreover, it is not [nor has ever been at any stage] the case of the prosecution that the Applicant is a flight risk, at risk of influencing any witnesses or tampering any evidence," the plea added.

The Court had framed charges against Imam in the matter under Sections 124A (sedition), 153A (Promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, etc.), 153B (Imputations, assertions prejudicial to national-integration), 505 (Statements conducing to public mischief) of the IPC along with Section 13 (Punishment for unlawful activities) of the UAPA.

Case Title: Sharjeel Imam v. The State of NCT of Delhi