Umar Khalid case: Can inferences be upheld as evidence?

On Tuesday, 2 September, a division bench of Justices Navin Chawla and Shalinder Kaur of Delhi High Court rejected the bail pleas of nine accused — Sharjeel Imam, Umar Khalid, Gulfisha Fatima, Athar Khan, Abdul Khalid Saifi, Mohd Saleem Khan, Shifa ur Rehman, Meeran Haider and Shadab Ahmed — in the Delhi riots case. The 133-page order explains why. Excerpts:

• The charge sheet runs into more than 3,000 pages, with an additional 30,000 pages of electronic evidence. The state carried out a detailed investigation, which led to the arrest of several individuals and the filing of four supplementary charge sheets, with multiple accused persons charge-sheeted, and as many as 58 witnesses, including protected witnesses, whose statements … .were recorded

• The pace of the trial will progress naturally. A hurried trial would also be detrimental to the rights of both the appellants and the state. The parties have informed that the trial is currently at the stage of hearing arguments on the framing of charges, thus, it indicates that the case is progressing

• Sharjeel Imam and Umar Khalid were the first ones to act after the CAB (Citizenship Amendment Bill) was passed, by creating WhatsApp groups and distributing pamphlets in the Muslim populated areas calling for protests and Chakka-Jaams, including the disruption of essential supplies… their role in the entire conspiracy is “grave”, having delivered inflammatory speeches on communal lines to “instigate mass mobilization of members of the Muslim community

• Umar Khalid – along with Sharjeel Imam – were the intellectual architects behind the entire conspiracy

• Appellant Umar Khalid also delivered speeches in Amravati on 17.02.2020, urging protests on 24.02.2020, which coincided with the State visit of the President of the USA, which is alleged by the prosecution to have deliberately been timed to cause violent riots on 23/24.02.2020 to garner international attention. The above role, as assigned by the prosecution to the Appellants, cannot be lightly brushed aside 

• Keeping in view the nature of the allegations, and specifically the submission of the learned Solicitor General and the learned SPP that the present is not a case of regular protest/riot matter, but rather a pre- meditated, well-orchestrated conspiracy to commit unlawful activities threatening the unity, integrity, and sovereignty of India, it becomes the arduous task of the Court to strike a balance between individual rights and the interests of the nation, as well as the safety and security of the general public at large. Therefore, these appeals do not succeed

• Any conspiratorial violence under the garb of protests or demonstrations by the citizens cannot be permitted. Such actions must be regulated and checked by the State Machinery, as they do not fall within the ambit of the Freedom of Speech, Expression, and Association

• The pace of the trial will progress naturally. A hurried trial would also be detrimental to the rights of both the Appellants and the State. The parties have informed this Court that the trial is currently at the stage of hearing arguments on the framing of charges, thus, it indicates that the case is progressing

• The probative value of the evidence against the Appellants Sharjeel Imam and Umar Khalid, prima facie and at this stage, cannot be branded as weak