In the case of the Delhi Riots, Sharjeel Imam was denied bail. Additional Sessions Judge Amitabh Rawat issued the order, the same judge who denied bail to Umar Khalid in a similar case.
A bail was denied to former Jawaharlal Nehru University(JNU) student Sharjeel Imam accused under the Unlawful Activites (Prevention) Act in connection with the Delhi riots of the 2020 on Monday.
ARGUMENTS FOR BAIL APPLICATION
Imam’s bail application contested by Tanveer Ahmed Mir, who stated that; the act of conspiracy as alleged by the prosecution did not occur because; his arrest occurred before the violence.
“Arrests come first, riots follow.” “I repeat, arrest first, riots later,” Mir urged.
Mir wondered if a conspiracy could continue after someone detained, and if; Imam could be charged for something that; happened after he arrested.
“The arrest of Sharjeel Imam is not for conspiracy, but for seditious comments previous to his detention,” Special Public Prosecutor Amit Prasad said. As a result, claiming that an arrest is for conspiracy is a misguided argument.”
The prosecutor further stated that; even if a plot discovered and investigating authorities able to avoid disturbances, it still be considered a conspiracy.
WHAT DID THE COURT SAY?
In a separate case involving Imam’s utterances, the Court had charged him with sedition, inciting hatred between communities, making statements for public damage, and engaging in criminal acts.
His speeches and the act of distributing pamphlets in Delhi and elsewhere said to have “promoted or attempted to promote, on grounds of religion, a feeling of enmity, hatred, and ill-will between two communities, namely Hindus and Muslims, or act prejudicial to the maintenance of harmony between the said two communities and likely to disturb public tranquilly.”
During protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) and the National Register of Citizens, these; remarks given by Imams at Aligarh Muslim University (AMU) and Jamia Milia Islamia in Delhi (NRC)