From Sharjeels video to intellectual terror: What happened in SC during bail hearing of Delhi riots accused

New Delhi: The Supreme Court of India on Thursday convened to hear the bail pleas of several people accused in the Northeast Delhi riots of 2020, including former JNU student leader Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam.

During the hearing, the Delhi Police, represented by Additional Solicitor General (ASG) SV Raju, argued that "intellectuals" are the "real brains" behind such violence and that the accused had used their educational backgrounds to fuel anti-national activities and instigate riots.

ASG Raju presented his case by highlighting a perceived trend where individuals with professional backgrounds, such as doctors and engineers, are allegedly engaging in anti-national pursuits rather than their chosen professions. He contended that Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam had "broken the secure fabric of JNU" and had used and "instigated" students from Jamia Millia Islamia to achieve their goals.

To substantiate these claims, a video of Sharjeel Imam's speeches was played in court. ASG Raju asserted that Imam's addresses were instrumental in inciting the riots and causing violence. When Justice Kumar inquired about the specific evidence to discuss the merits of the bail pleas, the ASG argued that the accused were not seeking bail based on the case's merits but were relying on the "ground of delay in trial."

The bail pleas under consideration were filed by Umar Khalid and his co-accused, including Sharjeel Imam, Meeran Haider, Shifa Ur Rahman, Mohd Saleem Khan, and Gulfisha Fatima. They are all facing charges under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) for allegedly conspiring to instigate communal riots and armed rebellion. Umar Khalid has been in incarceration for five years.

ASG Raju further elaborated on the alleged nature of the protests, stating that Imam, an engineering graduate himself, described the demonstrations not as "innocuous dharnas or protests," but as "violent protests" aimed at potentially separating Assam from India.

The ASG highlighted that the accused allegedly felt there wasn't "sufficient strength/protest" during previous sensitive issues like the abrogation of Article 370, the Babri Masjid, or triple talaq. They allegedly saw an opportunity in the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) bill to garner support from Muslims and mislead them, he said.

The prosecution detailed the alleged conspiracy, citing Imam's purported statements about choking Delhi and Assam of essential supplies, which ASG Raju argued fell under the economic security provisions of the UAPA. The ASG also claimed the protests were planned to synchronise with Donald Trump's visit to India to attract international media attention.

"Intellectuals, when they come, terrorists are more dangerous than ground-level terrorists. These intellectuals are the real brains," Raju said, referencing a recent blast near Delhi's Red Fort as an example of the consequences.

He argued that a narrative of "persecution against intellectuals was being built when, in reality, they were often more dangerous". He urged the court to "see between the lines," asserting that the "real purpose of the protest was regime change, strangulating the economic welfare, on a pan-India basis. CAA protest was just a red herring."

The hearing will continue on Friday, with the Supreme Court deliberating on the complex arguments presented by both the prosecution and the defence regarding the alleged conspiracy and the individuals' roles in the 2020 riots.