In a two-part series, we look at the reasons for the delay in disposal of the ‘big conspiracy’ case of the 2020 Delhi riots. In this first one, we take you through the case chronology
More than a year’s patience, nearly 400 court dates and a 17,000-page chargesheet describe the north-east Delhi riots as a “case of larger conspiracy” whose trial is yet to begin. While legal technicalities have often been cited as reasons for the delay, the Delhi High Court in a recent order asked for expeditious disposal of UAPA (Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act) cases, noting that these include serious offences. And it’s not easy for those people. In custody for bail.
The chargesheet includes stringent UAPA names of former AAP councilor Tahir Hussain, Pinjra Tod activists Natasha Narwal and Devangana Kalita, JNU alumnus Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam, Jamia Millia Islamia student Asif Iqbal Tanha and MBA student Gulfisha Fatima.
A total of 18 people have been named in the chargesheet, which accuses them of “engineering the February 2020 North-East Delhi riots under the guise of anti-CAA protests”. Five of the 18 accused have got bail.
According to the chargesheet, the accused planned and coordinated the disruption through various secret meetings and WhatsApp groups in which 53 people were killed and 581 were injured. The police have also alleged that the accused were the “top conspirators” who had instructed their “foot soldiers” to carry out the violence.
Presently, the defense lawyers are examining the documents and reports provided to them by the prosecution as evidence. While at least half a dozen rioting cases have gone to trial and charges have been framed in 67 cases, in the present case several applications were filed by defense lawyers, seeking prosecution evidence that they had earlier provided. had not been. Several ongoing bail applications, which have been pending for months, are also delaying the proceedings of the case.
Defense lawyers, who received the chargesheet copy six months ago, blamed the probe agency’s “inability to provide basic documents” for the delay in the case. According to him, unnecessary complications make defense preparedness a “nightmare exercise”.
hard copy issue
The Special Cell of Delhi Police had filed the chargesheet before the Karkardooma court on September 16, presenting the conspiracy theory of pre-planned riots. The court took cognizance of this within 24 hours and directed the prosecution to supply the soft copy of the charge sheet. Lawyer and hard copy to accused in jail.
The meltdown began when the prosecution reported the “inadvertent involvement” of the witnesses protected in the chargesheet copies. The court asked for a fresh set of copies along with the revised versions. On October 21, 2020, the prosecution informed and provided in pen drive and argued that they had complied with Section 207 of CrPC, which deals with supplying the accused with relevant police reports and other documents.
The Investigating Officer (IO) also requested for 15 days’ time to provide the hard copy of the charge sheet as the amount was to be sanctioned from the Delhi government. The court was not “impressed” by the submission and asked for immediate supply of hard copies. The order was then challenged by the Delhi Police, observing that it was passed mechanically, following which a single-judge bench of Justice Suresh Kumar Kait stayed the trial on November 10.
On November 22, the police filed a 930-page supplementary chargesheet in the case, in which Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam and one Faizan Khan were named as accused. A second supplementary charge sheet containing evidence from CCTV footage was filed in February 2021. During nine hearings, the trial was finally vacated five months later, on 23 March, after the prosecution submitted that the hard copies were ready for supply.
range of applications
It was in March 2020 that the lawyers of several accused applied under Section 207 of CrPC, seeking electronic evidence, WhatsApp chats and other documents which the prosecution relied upon while filing the chargesheet, but not attached to it. Did.
However, the prosecution opposed the applications of Devangana Kalita, who had sought copies of electronic evidence against her and Asif Iqbal Tanha, who had sought clone copies of their mobile phones seized by the police.
Police claimed that the digital data recovered from the confiscated devices was “large amounts” and contained personal content of several accused persons and that providing it to co-accused would “violate their privacy”.
It’s been eight months now. The disposal of Kalita’s petition is awaited. But Tanha got a cloned copy of his mobile phone. Several such applications are yet to be heard in the court. Umar Khalid filed his bail plea in July 2021 and it is currently in the prosecution’s stage of arguments.
A defense lawyer, requesting anonymity, accused the prosecution of not providing complete documents and forcing the accused to apply for evidence against them.
“The prosecution is bound to supply it. Without access to all of the material being used against us, how would I be able to cross-examine witnesses and prove myself guilty during the trial? The lawyer asked. “There is no question of early trial,” he said.
Public prosecutor Amit Prasad told in the case Hindu That there is no delay on the part of the police or the prosecution and the defense lawyers have the responsibility to check the documents and start the trial at the earliest.
“We want the trial to start early and all the witnesses testify at the earliest. But right now, defense lawyers are applying for documents both credible and unrelated, which is taking a lot of time,” he said, adding that once all the applications are disposed of, the debate on framing of charges can begin. Will go
With activist Khalid Saifi’s bail plea hanging for months with several adjournments, his wife Nargis Saifi does not expect the trial to begin anytime in the near future. “Our priority is to get him out on bail, especially since COVID is spreading so fast. Looking at the history of several postponements in the past, it seems impossible,” she said.
“The matter will go on for years. Justice is getting delayed,” said Matloob Alam, brother of another accused Meeran Haider, whose bail hearing is yet to end.
,