2020 riots larger conspiracy case: | Allegation of regime change quite extraordinary: Gulfisha Fatima in SC

Singhvi added that police were continuing to file chargesheet to prolong the incarceration of the accused. “I have been in jail for just under six years. There is a chargesheet filed on September 16, 2020 but as if it’s a ritual of chargesheets. Supplementary chargesheets are filed continuously. Till now we have got four supplementary and one main chargesheet.”

Pointing out that the arrest was in 2020, he said, “The delay is sad, astonishing and unprecedented.”

Singhvi said Fatima is “the only lady under incarceration” still and that “the other ladies got bail in 2021”. “My case is a much lesser case,” he said.

Seeking bail for her, he added, “In other countries, the liberty is ensured with anklets and GPS. What public interest are we serving by keeping her in jail? What will she do? Will she try to flee?”

Appearing for accused Umar Khalid, senior advocate Kapil Sibal said the police were claiming that he instigated the rioters but don’t have anything to back that.

Justice Kumar said, “Allegation in the chargesheet is that speeches which you gave led to the riots, which led to the death of 53 persons and many were injured.”

Sibal, however, said that the speech being referred to by police was made on February 17 at Amaravati in Maharashtra and the riots took place on “23rd, 24th and 25th in Delhi”. “I was not even here,” he said on behalf of Khalid.

Sibal played Khalid’s Amaravati speech, in which he was heard saying that the protestors will follow Gandhian ways. Sibal added, “I ask myself the question. An academician in an institution, what can he do to overthrow a country or state? Even in the High Court, they relied on this speech and there is a finding of the High Court (that I) prima facie delivered inflammatory speech on communal lines to instigate. Entire speech may be read. There is nothing stated on lines of communal riots.”

He contended that those who allegedly made inciting remarks have either not been booked or are on bail. “On what basis are they saying I instigated? I am saying I am prepared to sacrifice myself. If they want to send me to jail, fine, you can’t show somebody else’s speech and attribute that to me and say I gave that speech and I am responsible for that riot.”

Sibal added, “Somebody adds me to a WhatsApp group. I didn’t add myself. All those who sent the messages are either on bail or not an accused. I who sent no message is an accused.” He added that the investigators followed a policy of pick-and-choose to name the accused.

Delhi Police had earlier played videos of accused Sharjeel Imam’s speech during the anti-CAA protests, during which he allegedly advocated “cutting off the chicken neck area” to isolate Assam from the rest of the country. Opposing the bail plea of the accused, prosecution also said that “intellectuals when they guide and become terrorists, they become more dangerous than those working at the ground…”

Senior advocate Siddharth Dave, appearing for Imam on Tuesday, said such a tag causes “deep anguish” and was against the concept of presumption of innocence.

“First thing I would like to say. I am not a terrorist as I have been called by the respondent. I am not an anti-national as called by the state. I am a citizen of this country, citizen by birth. I have not been convicted for any offence uptil now but I am being labelled an intellectual terrorist,” he said.

He contended that Imam had already been prosecuted for the speeches which the police were citing to name him as having a hand in the conspiracy. “Yes, I have given those speeches and I have been prosecuted for those. If I am arrested for giving those speeches, how do I figure in this FIR for the same speeches,” Dave asked.