[Delhi Riots] Essence Of Speeches Made By Accused Persons Was To Create Sense Of Fear In Muslim Population: Prosecution Argues In High Court

Opposing the bail plea of Student Activist Umar Khalid in Delhi riots larger conspiracy case, the prosecution on Monday made a common submission before the Delhi High Court that the speeches made by various accused persons in the FIR had a 'common factor', essence of which was to create a sense of fear in the Muslim population of the country.

Special Public Prosecutor Amit Prasad appearing for Delhi Police specifically referred to the speeches made by Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam and Khalid Saifi to argue that they were all connected with each other at the relevant time as a part of conspiracy to commit 2020 riots.

"All speeches have one common factor which is in the entire speech, the essence is to create a sense of fear in Muslim population. I'll read speech of Sharjeel Imam, Khalid Saifi and Umar Khalid. When you talk about Babri Masjid or Triple Talaq, they relate to a religion. But when you talk about Kashmir, it's not an issue of religion, it's an issue of national integration," Prasad argued.

The argument was made before a special bench comprising of Justice Siddharth Mridul and Justice Rajnish Bhatnagar which was hearing the appeal filed by Umar Khalid challenging the Trial Court's order refusing him bail in the matter.

Prasad also called the speech given by Umar Khalid at Amravati in February 2020 as a 'calculated speech' for the reason that it not only referred to CAA and NRC, the focal point of protests, but also other issues specifically relating to one community.

"When my learned friend (Pais) said that there was nothing wrong in the speech (Umar Khalid's), even I say there is nothing wrong. It's a very calculated speech. It brings various points. One, Babri Masjid, two, Triple Talaq, three, Kashmir, four, Muslims are suppressed and five, CAA-NRC," Prasad argued.

Prasad further argued that it was the prosecution's case that there was misinformation which was spread during riots, creation of 24x7 protest sites which were moved strategically to cause blockade of roads, followed by attack on police personnel and paramilitary forces. He also argued that there was spread of violence in non-Muslim areas, damage to public properties and use of petrol bombs and other elements.

"Point that comes out is that your grievance is not against CAA NRC, it is against Babri Masjid and Kashmir. This is a pattern," Prasad argued.

Prasad also submitted that none of the protest sites were organic in nature and that they were created through WhatsApp groups with the help of mobilisation of various individuals.

"There is contention raised that protest sites came on their own. It was not so. They were created, not organic in nature, created with mobilizing people from various places. Each protest site is being managed and handled by people from Jamia and DPSG," he argued.

At the outset, Justice Mridul was of the view that there was an 'overlap' in the arguments made by the prosecution qua the allegations made against various accused persons in the chargesheet.

"The tones attributed to various appellants in chargesheet, there is definitely an overlap. In fact, we seem to be hearing Prosecution in relation to all of them. It's not as if there has been...of course there is individual accused of various offences but there is definitely an overlap," Justice Mridul said.

He added "Of course Prosecution will have to make good by ascribing individual roles to all accused, we're not on merits. We are saying that there is definitely an overlap in appeals before us."

Accordingly, leaving it to the parties to decide if the appeals of other co-accused persons are to be heard together or individually, the Court posted the matter for further hearing tomorrow.

Earlier, the Court had orally said that Umar Khalid's Amravati speech, may be in bad taste, but the same does not make it a terrorist act.

The same bench however, earlier said that the speech in question was obnoxious, hateful, offensive and prima facie not acceptable.

Umar Khalid was denied bail by city's Karkardooma Court on March 24. He was arrested on 13 September, 2020 and has been under custody since.

About the Trial Court Order

Additional Sessions Judge Amitabh Rawat was of the view that Khalid had connectivity with many accused persons and that his presence throughout in several WhatsApp groups during the period beginning from the passing of the Citizenship (Amendment) Bill in December 2019 till the February 2020 riots, had to be read in totality and not piecemeal.

On the other contention raised by Pais that Umar Khalid was not present in Delhi during the time of riots, the Court was of the view that in a case of a conspiracy, it is not necessary that every accused should be present at the spot.

Thus, perusing the charge­sheet and accompanying documents, the Court was of the opinion that allegations against the Umar Khalid were prima facie true and hence the bar for grant of bail as per Section 43D of the UAPA was attracted.

The Court noted that Umar Khalid's name finds a recurring mention from the beginning of the conspiracy till the riots. He was a member of WhatsApp groups of Muslim students of JNU. He participated in various meetings. He gave reference to Mr.Donald Trump in his Amaravati speech. He was instrumental in creation of JCC. He was also mentioned in the flurry of calls that happened post-riots.

The Court opined that target was to block roads at mixed population areas and encircle the entire area completely stopping the entry and exit of citizens living there and then creating panic to attack on police personnel by women protesters in front only followed by other ordinary people and engulfing the area into a riots and the same would be covered by the definition of terrorist act under Section 15 of the UAPA.