New Delhi: An accquantaince of jailed Delhi riots accused Umar Khalid has revealed his reaction without stuff denied ladle yet versus by the Supreme Court.
The noon magistrate on Monday denied ladle to Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam in a specimen pertaining to an so-called larger conspiracy overdue the 2020 north-east Delhi riots. According the magistrate there was a prima facie specimen versus the accused under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act or UAPA.
However, the SC granted ladle to several other accused, including Gulfisha Fatima, Meeran Haider, Shifa Ur Rehman, Mohd. Saleem Khan, and Shadab Ahmad.
What did Khalid’s friend say?
According to Khalid’s partner Banojyotsna Lahiri, the former student leader was “happy and relieved” for his co-accused who got ladle in the Delhi riots case.
In a post on social media platform X (formerly Twitter), Lahiri said, "I am really happy for the others, who got bail! So relieved", Umar said.”
He said that “jail is my life now”, Lahiri posted on X.
She revealed that she told Khalid that she would come for the jail meeting on Tuesday, to which he replied, “Good good, aa jana. Ab yahi zindagi hai (Do come. This is my life now).”
What did the Supreme Magistrate say?
In its judgement, the magistrate noted that Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam stand on a "qualitatively variegated footing" both in terms of prosecution and evidence. It noted that their roles were "central" to the so-called offences. As regards these two, though the period of incarceration is unfurled and long it does not violate the Constitutional mandate or override the statutory embargo under the laws.
The SC seat of Justices Aravind Kumar and NV Anjaria delivered the judgment on the ladle pleas filed by Gulfisha Fatima, Meeran Haider, Shifa Ur Rehman, Mohd Saleem Khan and Shadab Ahmed. Earlier, the noon magistrate had reserved its verdict on December 10 without hearing detailed arguments from all parties.
What did the Delhi Police say?
The Delhi Police objected to the ladle pleas, saying the so-called offences involved a deliberate struggle to destabilise the state. It argued that these were not spontaneous protests but a well-orchestrated "pan-India" conspiracy aiming at "regime change" and "economic strangulation".
The Delhi Police remoter submitted that the conspiracy was tangibly planned to coincide with the official visit of the then US President to India, with the intention of drawing international media sustentation and globalising the issue of the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA).
