Delhi Riots UAPA Case: Accused Move Court Seeking Clarity On Completion Of Delhi Police Investigation Before Arguments On Charge

Various accused in the 2020 Delhi riots larger conspiracy case on Thursday moved a Delhi Court seeking clarity from the Delhi Police on the overall status and completion of its investigation in the case being probed by the Special Cell, before proceeding with the arguments on charge.

The applications have been moved by Devangana Kalita, Natasha Narwal and Asif Iqbal Tanha before Additional Sessions Judge Amitabh Rawat of Karkardooma Courts.

In their application, Kalita and Narwal have sought a direction on the Delhi Police to state on record the status of investigation in the case and also to indicate when the probe will be completed. They have prayed that the probe agency be permitted to proceed to the stage of arguments on charge only after filing of a report before court.

Similarly, Tanha, apart from seeking status of the investigation, also seeks a direction on the Delhi Police to indicate a timeline as to when the probe will be completed. He has also prayed the investigating agency to state on record that the investigation qua him stands completed, prior to advancing arguments on charge.

During the hearing today, counsel appearing for co-accused Safoora Zargar and Sharjeel Imam told court that they will be adopting the submissions made by Tanha. The counsel representing accused Meeran Haider, however, said that a separate application seeking similar relief will be filed towards the end of the day.

Advocate Sowjhanya Shankaran appearing for Tanha submitted that in each supplementary chargesheet, the Delhi Police relied on the material which was already available with it to make further allegations qua Tanha. It is Tanha’s case that unless the prosecution is able to place a comprehensive and conclusive case qua him before court by completing investigation, the matter cannot be heard on charge.

“The investigating agency has itself stated in its five chargesheets that the same are to be read “conjointly” with one another, and that further chargesheets are to be placed before the Court which will also have to be read conjointly with the previous chargesheets. Therefore, in the absence of a statement from the investigating agency that its investigation is complete qua Applicant, it would be premature to hear arguments on charge qua him,” Tanha said in his application.

In this backdrop, Shankaran submitted that since there is no clarity on the completion of investigation, it is not difficult for the investigating agency to find evidence against Tanha and “fill the loopholes.”

“At some stage I need to know concretely what is the case against me,” Shankaran said.

She added, “They're not interested in telling us when and how investigation will be completed. It's their case that there were certain key conspirators who are yet to be chargesheeted. So it doesn't seem a case where investigation is completed.”

On the other hand, Advocate Adit S Pujari appearing for Narwal and Kalita submitted that the prosecution needs to crystalize its case qua a larger conspiracy in a chargesheet and that the same cannot be done without placing all the material which is available with it.

“In chargesheet, they [investigating agency] state that the terrorist act was committed by the accused persons by planning a chakka jam. That case as to how it's made out is what your lordship will be called upon to see if charges are framed. That case of the prosecution changed completely in SLP [before Supreme Court],” he said.

Narwal and Kalita, in their application, have said that the prosecution has been making submissions that they are delaying the progress of the case by filing applications, however, it has maintained a “studied silence” about the conclusion or even conduct of investigation in the first chargesheet which was filed as far back as in September 2020.

“Thus, the chain of events as described by the Prosecuting agency of a larger conspiracy is broken and it is ostensibly the very reason as to why the Prosecuting agency is seeking liberty to continue with the investigation to fill the loopholes in their case, as and when the same is pointed out,” their application states.

The matter will now be heard on Monday when counsel appearing for accused Meeran Haider will make submissions and Special Public Prosecutor Amit Prasad will commence submissions on behalf of the prosecution. 

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.