NEW DELHI: The Delhi Police on Thursday filed its affidavit before the Supreme Court in the 2020 Delhi riots case.
It submitted that the alleged offences by the accused persons, Sharjeel Imam, Umar Khalid and others involved a deliberate attempt to destabilise the State and therefore warranted "jail and not bail".
It further added in the affidavit that the accused persons allegedly conspired to strike at the sovereignty and integrity of the country by a "regime change operation" executed under the guise of "peaceful protest".
"The Ocular and irrefutable documentary, as well as technical evidence against the petitioners, show their intrinsic, deep-rooted and fervent complicity in engineering a nation-wide riot on communal lines. The conspiracy hatched, nurtured and executed by the petitioner was to strike at the very heart of the sovereignty and integrity of the country by destroying the communal harmony; instigating the crowd not only to abrogate public order but to instigate them to an extent of armed rebellion," said the affidavit filed by the Delhi Police.
The bail pleas of Imam, Khalid, and many others are expected to come up for hearing on Friday before a two-judge bench of the apex court, headed by Justice Aravind Kumar and Justice N V Anjaria.
The Delhi Police, in its affidavit, vehemently pleaded that the accused persons' bail pleas should be dismissed forthwith. It further added that the materials on record, including the chats referencing U.S. President Donald Trump, establish beyond doubt that the instant conspiracy was pre-planned to be executed at the time when US president was to make an official visit to India.
"This was done to draw the attention of international media, and to make the issue of CAA a global issue by portraying it as a pogrom of the Muslim community in India. The issue of CAA was carefully chosen to serve as a radicalising catalyst camouflaged in the name of peaceful protest," the affidavit said.
Delhi Police further contended that the evidence on record suggests that the instant conspiracy was sought to be replicated and executed PAN India.
"The magnitude and severity of the instant conspiracy can be estimated from the facts which are available in the public domain," it added.
"In the offences which strike at the very root of the integrity of India [UAPA offences], jail and not bail, is the rule. The allegations against the petitioner are prima facie true. The onus of refuting the said presumption rests with the petitioners, which they have miserably failed to discharge. The bail in the present case, specifically in view of the extreme gravity of the offence, cannot be granted only on the ground of delay for which the petitioner themselves are responsible," the affidavit added.
Delhi police seeking dismissal of the bail pleas further added that the conduct of the petitioners in the present case is riddled with brazen and blatant abuse of the process of law.
The petitioners, through their malafide machinations, have made every attempt available to them to delay, derail and obfuscate the investigation and trial in the matter.
"The delay which has occurred in the commencement of the trial is solely attributable to the petitioner. Both the Hon'ble High Court as well as the special court have given judicial findings elaborating as to how the petitioners working in tandem have not allowed the charge to be framed in the matter," it stated.
The police further submitted that the overarching argument of the petitioner that there are more than 900 witnesses in the matter and hence there is no likelihood of the trial being concluded in the present case is ex facie misleading.
"The evidences both oral as well as technical, available against the petitioners clearly establishes that the allegations against the petitioner are prima facie true and thus in view of the law laid down by this court, as quoted above, no liberty of bail can be granted to the petitioners for committing a heinous offence of highest order attacking the very roots of integrity and sovereignty of the country," said the affidavit.
On September 6, the former JNU student, Imam, moved the SC after the Delhi High Court rejected his bail plea. He sought bail in the larger conspiracy case under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA) in relation to the 2020 North East Delhi riots case.
Similarly, the former JNU student Umar Khalid, on September 10, had approached the Supreme Court challenging the Delhi HC's order rejecting his bail under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act case related to the alleged criminal conspiracy in the February 2020 riots in the national capital.
According to the prosecution, Delhi Police had booked Imam under the stringent Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA).
On January 28, 2020, he was arrested by the Delhi Police’s Crime Branch from Bihar’s Jehanabad in a sedition case for allegedly making inflammatory speeches at the Jamia Millia Islamia University and Aligarh Muslim University.
The riots took place in February 2020, following clashes over the then-proposed Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA).
The prosecution alleged that the accused, Imam, had hatched a larger criminal conspiracy to cause multiple riots.
The FIR in this case was registered by the Special Cell of the Delhi Police under various provisions of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the UAPA.
Imam was booked in multiple FIRs across several states, mostly under sedition and UAPA charges. Besides Delhi, Imam is facing FIRs in the States of Uttar Pradesh, Assam, Manipur and Arunachal Pradesh.
Imam was granted bail by the Delhi HC last year for the alleged speeches he gave at Jamia Milia Islamia University and Aligarh Muslim University.
In the sedition cases registered in Aligarh and Guwahati, he was granted bail by the Allahabad High Court in 2021 and the Gauhati HC in 2020, respectively. He was also booked in FIRs (First Information Report) in Arunachal Pradesh and Manipur.
However, the Delhi HC had on September 2 rejected the bail plea of nine persons, including Khalid and Imam, in the case, saying "conspiratorial" violence under the garb of demonstrations or protests by citizens couldn't be allowed.
The HC, which had rejected other accused's bail plea, included Mohd Saleem Khan, Shifa Ur Rehman, Athar Khan, Meeran Haider, Abdul Khalid Saifi, Gulfisha Fatima and Shadab Ahmed.
The social activist and former JNU student Khalid has been in jail since his arrest by the Delhi Police on September 14, 2020, for his alleged involvement in the Delhi riots case.
He was booked under the very stringent UAPA charge for his alleged involvement in a larger conspiracy. He denied the charges and claimed innocence in the case. Khalid had earlier approached the top court challenging an October 2022 Delhi HC verdict that had denied bail to him.
Since then, he has been in jail and never been on bail, despite his best efforts and filing constant appeals across courts, pleading to be released on bail.
He had initially, in the Delhi High Court, sought bail on grounds that he neither had any "criminal role" in the violence in the city's North-East area nor any "conspiratorial connect" with any other accused in the case.
The Delhi police had opposed the bail plea of Khalid in the HC.
The police also arrested Imam, activist Khalid Saifi, JNU students Natasha Narwal and Devangana Kalita, Jamia Coordination Committee members Safoora Zargar, former AAP (Aam Aadmi Party) Councillor, Tahir Hussain and several others under the stringent law in the case.
According to the prosecution, the violence had erupted following protests against the CAA and NRC. The protests had left 53 people dead and over 700 injured.
