SPP Amit Prasad also opposed the claims of former JNU student leader Umar Khalid that the probe agency was communal and that the chargesheet in the case of conspiracy to riots was a “figment of imagination”.
The Delhi Police on January 11 opposed the bail plea of former JNU student leader Umar Khalid, saying the “ultimate objective” of the conspiracy to riots was to bring the Indian government to its knees and destabilize the foundations of democracy.
Mr Khalid and several others have been booked under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), a strict anti-terror law, and were accused of “masterminding” the riots in which 53 people were killed and over 700 were injured. in 2020.
The debate on their bail pleas has been going on for more than five months.
Opposing his bail plea before Additional Sessions Judge Amitabh Rawat, Special Public Prosecutor (SPP) Amit Prasad opposed the claims of former JNU student leader Umar Khalid that the probe agency was communal and chargesheeted in the case of conspiracy to riot It was “a figment of the imagination”. ,
Representing the police, the SPP said, “The ultimate aim was to overthrow the government and undermine the authority of Parliament, which enacted the Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA) and destabilized the foundation of democracy.
“The idea was to bring the Indian government to its knees and implement it to withdraw the CAA. Not that I am making a statement. This is evident from the chats which explicitly say that the government has to be brought to its knees. ,
Mr Prasad further relied on the charge sheet to claim that the 2020 riots were not a spontaneous outburst of violence.
“From the charge sheet, we have demonstrated that 23 protest sites were created and those sites were not organic in nature. They were carefully planned with the location close to the mosques [Mosques],” They said.
“Several teams were formed to monitor these sites, to provide logistical support, there were remote observers, local leaders, visitors. We have also demonstrated the use of similar placards and banners at various protest sites which clearly shows that they were not organic and were created in a coordinated manner,” he said.
Mr Prasad said the protests were not women-dominated, but were managed by men, and the protest sites were enlarged by bringing in women from outside.
“We have also demonstrated from the chargesheet that there was a clear interconnection between the December 2019 riots and February 2020. A similar pattern of crime followed – attacking police, blocking roads, destroying properties, and violence against the public and police,” he said.
The chargesheet revealed that 53 people were killed, he said, adding that 101 police officers and 41 public figures were injured in the first phase of riots in December 2019. In the second phase, 132 police officers and 76 public figures were injured.
“Clearly there was a case of people getting killed and injured. The total loss and claim settlement amount is Rs 21.93 crore. 61 claims have been settled and more are yet to be settled,” the SPP said.
He said that the investigation of the case revealed that firearms, petrol bombs, acid attacks, sticks, iron rods were used to attack and kill police personnel, government servants and common people through pre-made large sized slingshots. , stone pelting was used.
Mr Prasad further said Mr Khalid, through his lawyer, focused on “irrelevant material” while arguing his bail application to distract the attention of the court.
“She [Umar] Wants his application to be decided in the context of a web series and to link the present case to ‘The Family Man’ or ‘The Trial of the Chicago 7’. You have nothing on merit, you want to divert the attention of the court, irrelevant material, you want to go to media trial, grab headlines,” the SPP said.
On September 3, 2021, Mr Khalid, through senior advocate Tridip Paid, said that the charge sheet in the case read like a web-series ‘The Family Man’ and scripted news channels. The lawyer also made reference to Voldemort, the villain of the Harry Potter films, to draw parallels between the statements in the chargesheet. On December 9, he again mentioned ‘The Trial of the Chicago 7’ in the courtroom.
To this the SPP said, ‘It is unfortunate to equate the riots where 53 people lost their lives, to a web series. He does not want to refer to the law laid down by the constitutional courts. The idea is that you create a public perception. You want to mention something that is relevant in the media and not in the law. The entire submission has been made on guesses and estimates. He further emphasized that the court cannot go on speculative analysis.
Further, Mr. Prasad contested the alleged claims made by Mr. Khalid that the investigating agency and the investigating officer are communal.
“I do not appreciate my learned friend’s argument that the investigating agency and the investigating officer are communal. The investigating agency belongs to a state, not to an individual. The first punishment in the riots case was that of a Hindu. To say that The investigating agency is communal, not well,” he submitted.
In the last hearing, Mr Khalid, through his lawyer, said that advocating against a law like the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) is not a crime and the police pressured witnesses to testify against him.
,