New Delhi: A Delhi court on Wednesday refused to grant bail to two persons, arrested in connection with the violent protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) near the Jamia Millia Islamia here.
The court noted that the allegations levelled against the duo were grave and serious and there was reasonable apprehension that they might indulge in similar behaviour if released.
Metropolitan Magistrate Rajat Goyal rejected the pleas of Sameer and Mohd Hanif, who were sent to judicial custody till December 31 on Tuesday.
“In view of the submissions made and that fact that allegations levelled against the accused are grave and serious and also because investigation in the case is still in its nascent stage, there is reasonable apprehension that the accused Mohd Hanif might indulge in similar behaviour and his release at this stage might not be conducive to maintenance of peace and harmony,” it said.
The court, however, noted that it was not expressing any opinion on the merits of this case.
During the hearing, the Delhi Police told the court that the duo had burnt police booths in the area and pelted stones on the police, which resulted in injuries.
The court had on Tuesday sent 10 arrested people– Hanif, Danish alias Jafar, Sameer Ahmed, Dilshad, Shareef Ahmed, Mohd Danish, Yunus Khan, Jumman, Anal Hassan, Anwar Kala– to judicial custody till December 31.
While Hanif is an auto driver, Danish is a plumber, Sameer works as a bike mechanic, Dilshad and Danish are daily wage labourers, Ahmed works as a vegetable vendor, Jumman is ahelper at a shop and Kala is a rag picker.
Police had arrested them on Monday for their alleged involvement in violence near JMI here and said that none of them were students.
During the hearing, Delhi Police told the court that some locals, instigated by politicians, participated in the violent protests and damaged property and injured several people.
“Some locals, on the instigation of politicians, damaged property, set on fire three police booths and ‘gheraoed’ people. Several citizens and police officers were injured in the violent protest,” the investigating officer said.
Police said a case was registered against them under various provisions of Indian Penal Code for unlawful assembly, rioting with deadly weapon, obstructing public servant, voluntarily causing hurt, attempt to commit culpable homicide, entering into criminal conspiracy with common intention and for using explosive substance.
They were also booked under sections of the Prevention of Defacement of Property Act.
The counsel for the two accused said they had been falsely implicated and made a scapegoat by the Delhi Police.
Sameer’s counsel told the court that he is a bike mechanic and was allegedly picked up by the police from his home.
“Some police officers came and took him (Sameer) to the police station. The camera footage from outside of his house can corroborate this fact,” the lawyer said.
Advocate Khalil A Ansari, appearing for Hanif, said the accused were previously arrested for petty crimes and therefore became an easy target.
“My client has been made a target. He is a citizen of this country and his rights should be protected. They have been previously arrested for petty crimes. One can clearly see the connection here. They have been arrested to show that police is doing something,” the lawyer told the court.
When the Judge asked the investigating officer on what basis were the arrest made, he said, “There are statements of police officers who were involved in identifying the people who had caused violence. There were also disclosure statements of the accused.”
The FIR, however, names seven others, including local politicians and student leaders of JMI in connection with the case but they have not been arrested yet.
The university had virtually turned into a battlefield on Sunday as police entered the campus and used force following the protest that led to violence and arson in which four DTC buses, 100 private vehicles and 10 police bikes were damaged.