The Delhi High Court on Thursday referred the bail plea of former Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) student Umar Khalid, arrested in connection with the 2020 north-east Delhi riots case, to be listed before another Bench which had previously heard it.
A Bench of Justices Mukta Gupta and Mini Pushkarna said that the bail plea was “part heard” by a Bench headed by Justice Siddharth Mridul as it forwarded the case to be heard by the same Bench.
The city police on previous hearings opposed Mr. Khalid’s bail plea saying that the narratives sought to be created by him could not be looked into as his defence at this stage.
In its response to Mr. Khalid’s bail plea, the Delhi police said the trial court had “rightly dismissed” his plea for release by a “well-reasoned order”.
On March 24, 2022 the trial court denied bail to Mr. Khalid saying that there were reasonable grounds to believe that the accusations against him were prima facie true. The former JNU student has challenged before the High Court the rejection of his bail application by the trial court.
The police said, “At the stage of bail, the narratives sought to be created by the appellant [Mr. Khalid] cannot be looked into as his defence. The appellant before the trial court raised ipse dixit arguments seeking to conduct a mini-trial at the stage of deciding the bail application and to view the appellant’s role in isolation in the case of conspiracy which is impermissible in law”.
The Delhi police claimed that the role played by different entities, WhatsApp groups and individuals in pursuance to the conspiracy behind the 2020 riots would be clearly demonstrated by the trial court orders, rejecting bail to the other co-accused in the case.
Mr. Khalid, arrested on September 13, 2020, is facing charges under the anti-terror law Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act for allegedly being one of the ‘masterminds’ and one of the main conspirators as well as instigators behind the north-east Delhi riots.
He sought bail on the ground that he was not present when the violence broke out and that no money was recovered from him and that the case was based on “cooked-up statements”.
