Khalid is an accused within the alleged bigger conspiracy behind the 2020 northeast Delhi communal riots (Image: PTI)
Khalid is an accused within the alleged bigger conspiracy behind the 2020 northeast Delhi communal riots
Former JNU pupil Umar Khalid’s WhatsApp chat revealed that he was within the behavior of making social media narratives to affect bail hearings, the Delhi Police on Wednesday advised a courtroom right here.
Khalid is an accused within the alleged bigger conspiracy behind the 2020 northeast Delhi communal riots. He has been booked beneath the stringent Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA).
Additional Sessions Judge Sameer Bajpai was listening to the second bail plea of Kahlid earlier than the particular courtroom. Concluding his arguments, Special Public Prosecutor (SPP) Amit Prasad stated, “The applicant’s WhatsApp chats also revealed that he is in the habit of creating media and social media narratives at the time of listing of bail applications of persons booked in cases clearly to influence bail hearings.”
“Similar exercise is being adopted while applicant’s bail (hearings) are being listed to influence his bail hearings, samples of posts on X earlier Twitter with hashtag about the applicant are annexed,” Prasad stated, including, the plea deserved to be dismissed within the curiosity of justice.
He cited the social media posts with the hashtag ‘Free Omar Khalid’ of a number of folks, together with Amnesty India, its former director Aakar Patel, activist Teesta Setalvad, Swati Chaturvedi (X deal with @bainjal), Kaushik Raj (X deal with @kaushikrj6). Detailing the posts, the SPP stated these included a comparability of Ram Rahim’s parole being granted with the Supreme Court allegedly deferring Khalid’s bail 14 instances, a publish in regards to the denial of Khalid’s bail being an “acute subversion of his rights”, his bail listening to being a “litmus test for the judiciary” and the denial of his bail being a “big blow to the right of peaceful protest”.
“While they (Khalid and others) claim that they were subjected to media trial, please see how he plays around with media, how his father is giving media interviews and people associated with him are also doing the same,” Prasad stated. On Tuesday, the SPP performed within the open courtroom a video of Khalid’s father being interviewed by a information portal.
Underlining that the accused’s father advised that portal that they didn’t place confidence in the Supreme Court, Prasad stated, “They don’t have faith in the Supreme Court and, therefore, they came to the trial court. This is how they are creating a narrative (in his favour). He had also named some people and entities with whom Khalid shared links, self-created content and social media posts with a request to share them on their social media accounts to set a particular narrative in his favour and also amplify it.
He referred to some news portals and actors Pooja Bhatt, Zeeshan Ayub, Swara Bhasker, Sushant Singh, Congress leader Jignesh Mewani and activist Yogendra Yadav, the SPP had said. On Wednesday, Khalid’s counsel, senior advocate Trideep Pais, rebutted the arguments, saying no incriminating evidence was seized from Khalid, and that “on whimsical statements, not even supported by witnesses, terrorist acts are foisted” towards him.
He claimed that the Delhi High Court and the particular courtroom, each of which had rejected Khalid’s bail pleas, didn’t distinguish between the alleged offences and the folks concerned. “They have just painted everything with a broad brush,” he stated, including the case had to be assessed by “the material qua each individual”.
He objected to the prosecution relying upon name element data (CDRs), saying it was a “tenuous evidence”. The counsel questioned the prosecution’s model the place they alleged that Khalid had deployed Bangladeshi kids and girls within the anti-CAA protests.
“Did any woman come out and say this against me?,” he stated. Stressing that the Supreme Court’s view about “prima facie evidence” towards an accused had modified, the counsel cited the Supreme Court granting bail to activist Vernon Gonsalves in July 2023 and subsequently to academic- activist Shoma Kanti Sen on April 5 this 12 months within the Elgar Parishad-Maoist hyperlinks case.
Under the UAPA provisions, the courtroom can deny bail if it thinks that there are cheap grounds for believing that the accusation towards an accused is prima facie true. Khalid’s counsel stated, “One of the witnesses in my case didn’t say anything but then miraculously said something two weeks later. All the witnesses here seem to be taking tablets for memory Prima facie the case requires depth, not frivolously reading out the chargesheet A mere meeting of accused individuals does not imply terrorism.” He additionally claimed that the prosecution cited “third-party evidence” to hyperlink Khalid with terrorist organisations and there was no credible case of a conspiracy to commit offences.
The matter has been posted for additional proceedings on April 24.
(This story has not been edited by News18 employees and is printed from a syndicated information company feed – PTI)
