Delhi Riots 2020: Police opposes before HC bail plea by Khalid Saifi

Delhi Police on Thursday before the Delhi High Court opposed the bail plea of United Against Hate UAH founder Khalid Saifi in a UAPA case related to the alleged conspiracy behind the 2020 riots saying that the prosecutions case was not a figment of imaginationA bench of Justices Siddharth Mridul and Rajnish Bhatnagar was told that it was clear from the WhatsApp messages exchanged between the accused persons that protests against CAA and NRC had to be followed by a chakka jam and then violenceThe protest does not remain in the domain of protest and became a conspiracy to commit riots Special Public Prosecutor Amit Prasad saidThe prosecution case is exactly what is stated in DPSG WhatsApp group It states that the first step is protest followed by chakka jam followed by violence All that is stated in DPSG Its not a figment of imagination of the prosecution he addedSaifi and several others including Sharjeel Imam and Umar Khalid have been booked under the antiterror law Unlawful Activities Prevention Act UAPA and provisions of the Indian Penal Code for allegedly being the masterminds of the February 2020 riots in the NorthEast Delhi which left 53 people dead and over 700 injuredThe violence had erupted during the protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act CAA and National Register of Citizens NRCDuring his submissions Prasad refuted Saifis claim that he had no connection with coaccused Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam saying that the same was not borne out by the material on recordAlso Read Support to BJP reflects anger against dynasty rule PM Modi to BJP workersWhile both Saifi and Khalid are omnipresent throughout the conspiracy Imam visited a protest spearheaded by Saifi in Khajuri Khas and gave speeches there he saidThere are clear messages that Khajuri Khas has the potential to become Shaheen Bagh and Shaheen Bagh we have seen is not organic It was masterminded by Sharjeel Imam Prasad submittedIt was also argued that the speeches made by Saifi were similar to the speeches made by Khalid and Imam and to say that there are no speeches is a wrong statement of factThe Special Public Prosecutor further said that Saifis discharge in another riot case does not take us to a logical end to say that there was no evidenceHe said that the case in relation to Saifi and Khalid was closed on the ground that they were facing prosecution in the present caseThe celebrated order regarding discharge that was quite a bone of contention to say look this is the kind of prosecution they are being made to face As far as Khalid Saifi and Umar Khalid are concerned The reason for their discharge is not lack of evidence but because they are being prosecuted in this case Prasad saidHe also contended that Saifi cannot be granted bail just because Ishrat Jahan another accused in the case has been given that relief or because he was allegedly a victim of custodial violenceIf they still have a grievance after NHRC closed Saifis case on allegations of custodial violence they have all the remedies available They chose not to but they choose to agitate more than a year later by way of bail proceedings Would bail be granted by such a contention Prasad askedHe defended the trial court order refusing to grant bail to Saifi on the ground that the judge had passed the order after going through the WhatsApp chat among the accused while objecting to the contention that UAPA cannot be invoked when ordinary law is capable of handling the caseKhalid Saifi 42 represented by senior advocate Rebecca John had earlier argued that the case against him is not based on evidence but frightening and alarming phrases by the police and he cannot be incarcerated indefinitelySaifi has been in custody in the present case since March 2020He has contended that Delhi Police has created prejudice against him and made a case even when there was no prima facie evidence for oneHe has also said that UAH was formed as a platform to campaign against the politics of hate and the WhatsApp chats which form the basis of the Delhi police case against Saifi have to be taken in their totality and his contribution in those groups has to be seenIt has also been argued that Saifis role had to be distinguished from that of coaccused Umar Khalid who was recently denied bail by the bench and that he had no connection with coaccused Sharjeel Imam as wellThe matter would be heard next on December 12This story has been sourced from a third party syndicated feed agencies Midday accepts no responsibility or liability for its dependability trustworthiness reliability and data of the text Midday managementmiddaycom reserves the sole right to alter delete or remove without notice the content in its absolute discretion for any reason whatsoever