In a recent development, the Delhi High Court has issued a notice on Sharjeel Imam's plea challenging the framing of charges against him in connection with the alleged violence during the 2019 anti-Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) protests in Jamia Nagar. Justice Sanjeev Narula sought a response from the Delhi Police regarding Imam's petition. Represented by Advocates Talib Mustafa and Ahmad Ibrahim, Imam has also filed an application seeking an interim stay on the trial court's order. The High Court, however, has decided to await the prosecution's reply before considering a stay and has scheduled the next hearing for April 24.
This legal action follows a March 7 order by a trial court that framed charges against Imam, Asif Iqbal Tanha, and nine others for their alleged roles in the 2019 protests. The trial court characterized Imam as not only an instigator but also a key figure in a larger conspiracy to incite violence. It noted that Imam, a senior Ph.D. student, delivered speeches designed to evoke anger and hatred, leading to widespread violence by unlawful assemblies on public roads. The court described his speeches as "venomous," accusing him of pitting one religion against another and delivering what it termed a hate speech.
The case originates from an incident in December 2019, when protests against the CAA near Jamia Millia Islamia University escalated into violence. During these protests, approximately 41 vehicles, including both government and private property, were reportedly damaged, and stones were allegedly thrown at police officials. Imam was arrested in January 2020 for his alleged involvement in inciting communal tensions during these protests.
In a related matter, the Delhi High Court had previously set aside a trial court's order that discharged Imam and ten others in the 2019 Jamia Nagar violence case. The High Court ordered the framing of charges against them, emphasizing that while peaceful dissent is a fundamental right in a democracy, violent collective action to express ideological differences or opposition to government policy is unacceptable. The court highlighted that the protests in question were not peaceful resistance but had escalated into riots.
Furthermore, in July 2020, the Delhi High Court rejected Imam's plea challenging a trial court's decision to grant the police additional time to complete their investigation. The trial court had extended the investigation period by three months beyond the statutory 90 days, a decision upheld by the High Court, which found no merit in Imam's challenge.
As the legal proceedings continue, the Delhi High Court's notice on Imam's current plea marks another chapter in the ongoing judicial examination of the events surrounding the 2019 anti-CAA protests and the subsequent allegations of incitement and violence.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.