Delhi HC on Sharjeel Imam: Compelling reason required for pre-conviction detention of person

Questioning the denial of bail by a trial court to Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) student Sharjeel Imam for alleged provocative speeches during the anti-CAA protests, the Delhi High Court said compelling reasons are required for pre-conviction detention of a person. The HC asked the police why he shouldn’t be granted bail.

A bench of justices Siddharth Mridul and Anoop Kumar Mendiratta questioned why the trial court judge hadn’t dealt with anything. “All these offences are less than seven years (punishment). We are asking you (police) why he should not be enlarged on bail? Is he at flight risk? Will he tamper with evidence? Who are the witnesses?” they asked.

The division bench said the court “is loath” to permit detention in the absence of compelling circumstances prior to the conviction: “Convict a man and sentence him is a different matter but for pre-conviction detention, there have to be compelling reasons for us to detain. We don’t know how long this trial will take.”

The special public prosecutor Amit Prasad, appearing for Delhi Police, told the court that Imam has been charged with Section 124A (punishment for sedition) of the Indian Penal Code, which entails life imprisonment, the court said that sedition requires specific calls for violence, and that this issue has been dealt with by constitutional courts long ago.

The bench said that they did not want to reinvent the wheel and that there has to be “incitement of violence”. “There has to be a conscious act promoting violence. You examine it,” underscored the bench.

Imam, a PhD student from JNU, moved the high court challenging an order of January 24, 2020, when the trial court dismissed his bail plea and framed charges against him for alleged provocative speeches delivered during the Citizenship (Amendment) Act protests and the National Register of Citizens (NRC) in Assam under IPC section 124A (sedition), section 13 of UAPA and other provisions of the penal code.

The alleged speeches for which Imam was arrested were made in Delhi’s Jamia Nagar area on December 13, 2019, and at the Aligarh Muslim University on January 16, 2020. He has been in judicial custody since January 28, 2020.

The court observed that section 13 does not fall under Chapter IV of UAPA — which pertains to terrorist activities, and thus he does not require to meet the stringent conditions for bail under the anti-terrorism law. It is a regular bail case, it added.

Advocate Tanveer Ahmad Mir, representing Imam, had argued that the FIR sought to pick up three lines from a speech to portray as if he were spreading hatred.

The court granted police 10 days to respond to the petition and listed it for hearing on March 24. “You’d have to really persuade us that he should not be on bail,” said the division bench.