The division bench of Delhi High Court under Justice Siddharth Mridul and Justice Talwant Singh have the bail pleas of in a sedition case together on January 30.
The division bench was hearing the interim bail plea by Sharjeel Imam in a case where he is charged under Sections 124A, 153A, 153B, 505 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 13 of the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act. Imam is in custody for three years.
While the hearing was on, the counsel for Imam said that it was seeking interim bail in the sedition case pursuant to the Supreme Court’s directions to keep abeyance of the cases related to S.124A (Sedition). It was added that the trial court had granted bail to him in the 2019 Sedition case, in September last year.
The court said that there is another regular bail plea pending before the Special Bench dealing with the Delhi Riots 2020 cases.
The bench observed, “The two pleas pertain to the same FIR, you cannot press the same issue simultaneously. We will hear the two pleas against denial of the regular bail and interim bail together.” Accordingly, the court preponed the date of the regular bail from April 10 to January 30.
In October 2022, a division bench of Justices Mukta Gupta and Anish Dayaldirected the trial court to examine the prosecution witnesses in the Sedition case against Sharjeel Imam in connection with the North-East Delhi Riots 2020.
Earlier, in July 2022, Imam had moved two pleas seeking a stay on trial in a Sedition case and a grant of interim bail in the case. His pleas had been dismissed by the trial court in light of the Supreme Court’s order dated 11th May 2022 in S.G. Vombatkere v. Union of India whereby Section 124A of the IPC had been put on hold and that he has been wrongfully charged under Section 13 of the UAPA.
In July, Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) Amitabh Rawat rejected the bail plea stating that the charges had been framed against Imam under all these sections and bail application of the accused had already been considered and rejected by the Court vide order dated 24th January 2022 whereby the Court had considered all the merits of the case and the applicability of Sections 124A, 153A, 153B, 505 of IPC and Section 13 of UAPA.
Imam had moved a bail application in a case where he was charged with the offences under Sections 124A, 153A, 153B, 505 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 13 of the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act. The court declined his prayer for a stay on his trial and noted that there cannot be another bail application by the accused and other arguments on the merits of the case of the bail application.
The Court had stated that there can only be one bail order on the merits of the case and the Court could not pass an order again on the merits, that too in an interim bail application. “Otherwise, by this logic, there can be two bail orders on the merits of the case at the same time passed by this Court. The merits of the case cannot be agitated again in an interim bail application in view of the disposal of the previous bail application and orders on charge both dated 24.01.2022,” it remarked.
The Court had also stated that interim bail applications can be considered only upon some exigencies or necessities like a medical condition and not on the merits of the case as such.
The Court had also declined the oral prayer made by Imam for the stay of the present criminal trial in view of the above order of the Supreme Court noting that the trial is continuing against the accused not only in respect of offence under Section 124A IPC but also for the offence under Section 153A, 153B, 505 IPC & Section 13 of the UAPA.