New Delhi [India], August 23 (ANI): The Delhi Police while opposing the bail plea of Umar Khalid before the Delhi High Court on Tuesday said that the PFI and others were behind the protest in Shaheen Bagh.
According to Delhi police, there are many elements of the conspiracy.
The court will hear the further arguments on August 25.
The Delhi High Court was hearing the bail plea of Umar Khalid, an accused in a larger conspiracy case of North East Delhi Violence of 2020. The trial court had rejected the bail plea.
The division bench of justices Sidharth Mridul and Rajnish Bhatnagar heard the arguments advanced by Special Public Prosecutor (SPP) Amit Prasad. The bench will hear further arguments on Thursday.
SPP Amit Prasad submitted before the court that the “DPSG” WhatsApp group was prominent in organising, controlling and mobilising the protests sites. Everything was reported to “DPSG” and was supervised and controlled by the senior members of the group, informed SPP.
SPP Prasad referred to the chat of the group to show that every small detail was deliberated and decision were taken thereafter. This shows how sensitive and aware this group was.
He said the first phase of protest at Shaheen Bagh failed due to non-mobilisation and the projection of it as Muslim-dominated.
In the context of conspiracy, the SPP said that he had argued on the first date that there were top conspirators and one of the conspirators was PFI.
He argued that during the second phase of the protest the organisers and supervisors were trying to keep the protest secular and women-dominated.
He also said the protest sites were not managed and supported by locals.
He referred to the chats which show that Natasha Narwal, a JNU student who was residing in the North campus area was a person of responsibility for the protest site at Seelampur.
SPP also referred to the chats which read that almost all the sites are in proximity of Muslim areas which will help the BJP to build up an anti-Hindu narrative. So try to mobilise more Hindus to the protest sites.
He also referred to the chats between Rahul Roy, Nadeem Khan, Athar, Priyadarshini Chaudhry, Apoorvanand and Yogendra Yadav.
He referred to one of the chats which read that “the protest sites should look women-centric, so give them stage and stay unstructured.”
He also referred a chat that reads that “Khureji has potential of becoming Shaheen Bagh. So we should send more people to this site.”
SPP Amit Prasad argued that everything that was in JCC was reflected in DPSG. He said every instruction was taken in the group. Speakers and artists were being sent to the sites on the instructions of DPSG.
He referred to a chat which reads that Hindu Mahasabha is threatening to remove the protest site. After this message, it was advised to go Facebook live if this happens. He also referred a chat in which a person of responsibility was asking if Delhi Police is installing CCTV at the Idgah site. Then one of the members said “asks them to put black tape on the camera.”
SPP also argued that every site and action was supported by a legally trained mind and legal support was provided by the lawyer on the instructions of the member of DPSG.
During the hearing on August 1, the prosecution had said that the North East Delhi riots were the results of a larger conspiracy and the idea was to create a sense of fear in the minds of Muslims and to paralyse the city.
It was to be done through mobilisation on the name of Babri Masjid, Triple Talaq, suppression of Muslims, CAA-NRC and the Kashmir issue, argued by Amit Prasad.
Amit Prasad further argued that WhatsApp groups like UAH, DPSG, MSJ and others were created. The DPSG group was created by Rahul Roy. Umar Khalid and the other accused were part of the group.
Justice Siddharth Mridul asked, “Is Rahul Roy made accused?” SPP replied that many other accused hav been named in the charge sheet.
The SPP argued that most of the accused persons were connected through WhatsApp groups which were being used for mobilisation and for call of the protest and chakka jaam.
He argued that the mobilisation was based on five factors — the issue of Babri Masjid, the suppression of Muslims, the issue of Triple Talaq, the Kashmir issue and the CAA-NRC.
He had also argued that the idea was to create fear and paralyse the city by mobilising the people on these factors.
The idea was to paralyse the entire area of northeast Delhi by blocking two major roads namely Wazirabad Road and Seelampur Road with a disruptive chakka jam. Sharjeel had talked of disruptive chakka jaam, Delhi police alleged.
The senior advocate appearing for Umar Khalid had concluded his arguments on the bail plea. He submitted that no case of conspiracy is made out against his client and there are major contradictions in the statement of witnesses.
It was also argued that Sharjeel Imam was connected and known to each other. Sharjeel was introduced to Yogendra Yadav by Umar Khalid at a protest in Jantar Mantar in January 2020.
The said objectionable speech was allegedly given by Umar Khalid in Amaravati on 17 February 2020. He was booked under UAPA by Delhi Police and was arrested on 13 September 2020.
Senior Advocate Tridip Pais had argued that there is no material, no basis of allegations in the charge sheet. It is based on hearsay.
During the argument on May 23, 2022 he had argued that Sharjeel Imam had criticized a secular movement against CAA and Khalid does not agree with it.
Pais had said I am (Umar Khalid) being lumped with a person who calls for a deeply communal protest against CAA. There is no ideological meeting of minds. (ANI)
This report is auto-generated from ANI news service. ThePrint holds no responsibility for its content.