New Delhi:

The Delhi High Court on Monday sought the stance of the city police on student activist Sharjeel Imam’s plea seeking bail in a 2020 communal riot case involving sedition and illegal activities.

A bench of Justices Suresh Kumar Kait and Manoj Jain issued notice to the Delhi Police on Imam’s appeal against the trial court’s order rejecting the bail petition.

The defendant’s barrister said the trial court erred in denying him bail even though his sentence was more than half of the maximum sentence on conviction.

According to the prosecution, the Imam gave speeches at Jamia Millia Islamia on December 13, 2019, and Aligarh Muslim University on December 16, 2019, threatening to cut off Assam and other parts of the northeast from the country contact.

Imam has been booked in a case registered by the Delhi Police Special Branch. The case was initially registered for sedition and later Section 13 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act was invoked. He has been detained in connection with the matter since January 28, 2020.

Imam claimed before the trial court that he had been detained for four years and under Section 13 of the UAPA, the maximum sentence is seven years if found guilty.

According to Section 436-A of the Criminal Procedure Code, a person can be released if he has served more than half of the maximum sentence prescribed for the crime.

Although the court of first instance refused to grant him bail on February 17, it ruled after hearing the prosecution’s case that the imam’s detention period could be further extended in “exceptional circumstances”.

In 2022, the trial court held the case under IPC sections 124A (sedition), 153A (promoting enmity), 153B (offense detrimental to national integration) and 505 (expression causing public harm) and 13 (unlawful conduct). punishment for the act) to bring charges against the Imam. Activities of UAPA).

The trial court said in its order that the Imam delivered various speeches in Delhi, Aligarh, Asansol and Chakbandh to incite people, which ultimately led to communal riots in different parts of Delhi.

“The content of the speech clearly shows that the applicant incited the public to conduct Chakka Jam and blockade the city. Particularly, in the speech delivered at Aligarh Muslim University (AMU) on January 16, 2020, the applicant stated that if the organization Once a certain number of people rise up, the northeastern region of the country can be permanently or temporarily cut back.”

It was also claimed that although the Imam did not ask anyone to take up arms and kill, his words and activities mobilized the public and disrupted the city, which may have been the main reason for the outbreak of riots.

The trial court also said that while Section 124A of the IPC cannot be considered, “if the conduct and actions of the applicant are considered, it can be considered as seditious conduct in the normal dictionary meaning”.

On May 11, 2022, the Supreme Court stayed the execution until the Center and states further order registration of FIRs, investigation and enforcement action for sedition across the country until the government convenes an appropriate forum to re-examine the colonial practices. Criminal Law of the Times.

The matter is due to be heard in April next year.

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)