New Delhi: The Delhi High Court on Wednesday granted statutory bail to activist Sharjeel Imam in a sedition case for allegedly making inflammatory speeches in the Jamia area and Aligarh Muslim University in 2019.
A division bench of Justices Suresh Kumar Kait and Manoj Jain granted bail to Sharjeel, who was a research scholar at the Jawaharlal Nehru University when he was arrested four and a half years ago.
He had sought statutory bail on the grounds that the period in custody was half of the maximum seven years punishment for the offence. Sharjee has been in jail since January 2020. He is also an accused in the larger conspiracy of the Delhi riots case.
On 24 March, the High Court issued notice to the Delhi Police on his plea challenging a trial court order denying him bail in the sedition case. His plea was dismissed on 17 February.
This case pertains to alleged inflammatory speeches by Sharjeel Imam in Aligarh Muslim University (AMU) and Jamia area in 2019 against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA).
It was argued that he has been in custody for the last 4 years, which is more than half of the maximum sentence. Incidentally, the proceedings under Sedition cases have been stayed by the Supreme Court.
Advocate Talib Mustafa and Ahmad Ibrahim appeared for Sharjeel Imam.
Advocate Mustafa told the high court that Imam’s bail order was initially reserved for three months, and then the presiding judge was transferred. The matter was then listed for fresh arguments before a current special judge.
On the other hand, special public prosecutor Amit Prasad opposed the bail saying the gravity of the offences had to be considered, and not just the period undergone. He said the period of sentence under all offences should be considered by the court.
The prosecutor also argued that the integrity and sovereignty of the country would be in danger if the accused was released on bail.
Prasad questioned whether the accused under UAPA with multiple offences who had undergone half of the sentence was entitled to be released on bail under Section 436A CrPC. Advocate Mustafa argued he was.
On the other hand, the Delhi Police said there were multiple offences, not only one. Section 436 of CrPC talks only about “an offence”.
Amit Prasad had earlier argued that a concurrent sentence was an exception, whereas a consecutive sentence was the rule. In this way, the maximum sentence Sharjeel could be awarded was 16 years, the punishment for which is restricted to 14 years.
Sharjeel’s counsel submitted the applicant has been in custody since 28 January 2020, in connection with an FIR registered for the offences punishable under 124A, 153A, 153B, and 505(2) IPC and Section 13 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967.
It was submitted that the applicant was arrested from his hometown of Jehanabad, Bihar and was produced before the Patiala House Court. Since then, he has been in judicial custody after police interrogation.
The investigation in the matter was concluded and a final report/chargesheet against the applicant had been filed in this case on July 25, 2020.
The court took cognizance of the offences and thereafter charges were formally framed on 15 March 2022.
The application also said the Supreme Court put the sedition law on hold in May 2022, following which the Delhi High Court on 10 October 2022 directed that the trial be stayed in respect of material witnesses and only formal witnesses be examined.
This report is auto-generated from ANI news service. ThePrint holds no responsibility for its content.