Updated: September 7, 2021 7:51:06 am
Former JNU student Umar Khalid has withdrawn his bail application in a northeast Delhi riot UAPA case and substituted it with a new one, stating that the prosecution was resorting to dilatory tactic, in a Delhi court. Additional Sessions Judge Amitabh Rawat has adjourned the matter to Wednesday asking the prosecution to file a reply to the new application.
This development comes against the backdrop of the prosecution raising the issue of maintainability of the bail application filed by former Congress councillor Ishrat Jahan.
In this case, the prosecution had argued that Jahan’s bail plea was filed under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) and the same could not be entertained by a special court. The prosecution had contended that Jahan’s only option was to withdraw the present bail plea and file a fresh one under the relevant provision of Section 437 CrPC.
During Umar’s bail hearing, special public prosecutor Amit Prasad said that he will file a reply to the application. He told the court, “To paint prosecution that it is (using) a dilatory tactic, is something I will have to reply to.”
Khalid’s lawyer, senior advocate Trideep Pais, told the court he was withdrawing his bail application and substituting it with a new one.
“I have filed an application to substitute the bail application. I don’t want it to come in the way. There is no impediment for the court to consider under the relevant provision,” Pais told the court.
Pais asked the court to let him continue with the arguments so that a “day’s time is not wasted”. He submitted that the written response of the prosecutor that it is not a dilatory tactic may come on record.
The court, however, stated that if the previous bail application is withdrawn, then as per procedure the prosecution has to file a fresh reply stating that it does not want technical issues to come later on in the case.
On the last date of hearing, Pais argued at length submitting that Umar was painted as communal in the UAPA chargesheet, whereas it was the officer who drafted the chargesheet who was communal.
Pais had argued that the “witness statements are being fabricated against me” and one protected witness was “speaking in forked tongues”.
He also drew parallels between the statements carried in the chargesheet to Harry Potter villain Voldemort’s references among other examples to state that the final report filed by the police was “rubbish” and “no one should be arrested in this case.”
📣 The Indian Express is now on Telegram. Click here to join our channel (@indianexpress) and stay updated with the latest headlines
- The Indian Express website has been rated GREEN for its credibility and trustworthiness by Newsguard, a global service that rates news sources for their journalistic standards.