The Delhi High Court will hear the bail petitions of Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam and Ishrat Jahan, accused in the Delhi riots case, on July 22.
In the last hearing on May 30, the High Court had said that the speech was certainly in bad taste… talking about things which were inappropriate, but the same did not make it to be an act of terror.
The Division Bench of Justice Siddharth Mridul and Justice Rajnish Bhatnagar had made the observation, while hearing the appeal filed by Umar Khalid, challenging the march 24 order of the Trial Court, refusing him bail in the case.
“The speech is in bad taste, but it does not make it a terrorist act. We understand that extremely well… Offensive and distasteful it was. It may tantamount to defamation, other offences, but it does not tantamount to a terrorist activity.” the bench had observed.
This point came when the advocate of Umar Khalid began to refer the allegation that was cast during the speech that was given by the student leader on February 17, 2020.
While the hearing was in progress on May 30, Senior Advocate Trideepp Pais, assisted by Advocate Sanya Kumar, read all the statements from the witnesses to show the court that the meeting in Seelampur was not at all a secret meeting, as alleged.
The advocate said that all the protected witnesses namely Sierra, Smith, Echo, Delta and Gama do not in any part of their statement mention word like secret meeting.
Advocate Kumar gave numerous other evidences like call detail of co-accused Natasha Narwal, which showed that she was also not present at Seelampur on the date in question. Kumar also highlighted the other incongruencies that the statements given by protected witnesses had.
An important point by the Counsel was that why would Umar Khalid and other persons, including the co-accused regarding the alleged secret meeting in Seelampur, would post anything in Facebook.