Court Denies Bail To Tahir Hussain In Delhi Riots Larger Conspiracy Case, Says His Acts May Fall In Definition Of Terrorist Act Under UAPA

A Delhi Court on Saturday denied bail to former Aam Aadmi Party Councillor Tahir Hussain in the UAPA case alleging a larger conspiracy into the 2020 North-East Delhi riots.

Additional Sessions Judge Sameer Bajpai of Karkardooma Courts dismissed the bail plea of Tahir Hussain yesterday, observing that his acts may fall in the definition of terrorist act under UAPA.

“In the case in hand, the allegations against the applicant, as mentioned earlier are such that his acts may fall in the definition of Terrorist act. As such, at this stage, it cannot be said that the provisions of UA(P)A as mentioned in the charge-sheet are not applicable to the applicant,” the court said.

The judge arrived at a conclusion that there were reasonable grounds for believing that the accusations against Hussain were prima facie true.

“As far as the role of the applicant as shown by the prosecution is concerned, record shows that the applicant while participating in the conspiracy, not only funded the activities of the riots but also participated in the other activities which led to the riots,” the court said.

It added that the witnesses gave statements against Tahir Hussain to show as to how he was instigating the protesters and gathered the protesters on the roof of his house and was himself involved in throwing petrol bombs etc. on the public.

“It is also on record that the applicant got released his licenced revolver just two days before the alleged incidents and used the same as 22 spent or used cartridges were recovered from his house. Besides this, allegedly the applicant got converted approximately Rs. 1.5 crore in cash, which was used in the rioting and the said fact has been confirmed through the statements of different witnesses and examination of relevant bank accounts,” the judge said.

Furthermore, the court rejected Hussain's request of granting bail on the grounds of parity to co-accused Ishrat Jahan.

The court observed that when the main consideration to grant bail to Ishrat Jahan was the fact that she was a woman, the same cannot be taken into consideration for Hussain's bail.

“Thus, in view of the facts as discussed above and the bar under Section 43(D)(5) of UA(P)A, the Court does not find the case of the applicant to be a fit case for granting bail,” the court said.

FIR 59 of 2020 is being probed by Delhi Police's Special Cell. The case has been registered under various offences under the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967.

The accused in the case are Tahir Hussain, Umar Khalid, Khalid Saifi, Isharat Jahan, Meeran Haider, Gulfisha Fatima, Shifa-Ur-Rehman, Asif Iqbal Tanha, Shadab Ahmed, Tasleem Ahmed, Saleem Malik, Mohd. Saleem Khan, Athar Khan, Safoora Zargar, Sharjeel Imam, Faizan Khan and Natasha Narwal.

Click here to read order