Umar Khalid Claims Police Singled Him Out, Didn't Make Others With 'Bigger Role' As Accused In Delhi Riots Case

Former JNU scholar Umar Khalid on Thursday alleged before a Delhi Court that the Delhi Police indulged in “pick and choose” action and only named him as an accused in the 2020 Delhi riots larger conspiracy case, while leaving various other individuals, including some who are attributed “bigger role” in the chargesheet.

Senior Advocate Trideep Pais made the submission on behalf of Khalid before Additional Sessions Judge Sameer Bajpai of Karkardooma Courts, while opposing framing of charges against Khalid.

The case relates to FIR 59 of 2020 investigated by Delhi Police's special cell. The UAPA case alleges a larger conspiracy in the commission of the 2020 North-East Delhi riots.

Pais referred to the first supplementary chargesheet filed by the Delhi Police and the material cited against Khalid based on which he was named as an accused in the case.

“Several persons, identically situated, no qualitative difference between my role and their role. But I am (roped in),” he said.

Pais said that Khalid is accused of being part of WhatsApp groups- DPSG, JCC, JACT and Muslim Students of JNU. He submitted that if Umar Khalid was named an accused on the virtue of being part of the said groups, then why none of the admins were made an accused.

“Be that as it may, what is the qualitative difference between me and the another person in same group?” he asked.

He then referred to the statements given by some protected prosecution witnesses to the Delhi Police to argue that the same do not make out an offence under UAPA or any offence at all.

In one of the statements, it was mentioned that there was a “conspiratorial meeting” on December 08, 2019, in Jangpura attended by Umar Khalid, and various others, including Yogendra Yadav and Nadeem Khan .

“He (Yadav) wrote an editorial, an op ed, on this FIR in which he asks the question why I am not an accused…. What is the qualitative difference? What Yogendra Yadav and Nadeem Khan did as opposed to what I did or what Sharjeel Imam did? I am not saying that you don't have other material to try to pin on me but this incident which you are using as a conspiracy, why are those (people) not accused? Also, according to me they have done nothing wrong,” he said.

“If this is the conspiracy on which you are pegging, then why don't you have others as accused?” he continued.

Pais then referred to a statement of one Tahira Dawood in which it was mentioned that Khalid talked about protesting all over India and including muslim students in the protests. “Far and wide, I don't see any terror in this,” Pais said.

Further, he also referred to the statement of one Parvez Alam, not named as an accused in the case. Pais said that Alam attributed similar role to each person in the Jangpura meeting or even offered bigger roles to others but only Khalid was named an accused and not others.

“In the meeting spoken of by this person at Jungpura, he attributes similar role to each person or he offers some role to others. Not accused. To some, he even attributes bigger roles. But I am accused and they are not. How is it criminal is not understood. Nobody attributed any decision to me,” Pais contended.

Referring to the statement of protected prosecution witness Bravo, Pais said that DPSG group, which is claimed to be the starting point of the conspiracy, was started by one Rahul Roy and Saba Diwan, both of whom are not accused.

“All roles as to who will do what is given to different people by Saba. Umar Khalid has not given any works…How do you delineate my role to be higher or lower than the others?,” he said.

The matter will now be heard on October 14.

Earlier, Pais had flagged fabrication of evidence found by the trial court in seventeen 2020 Delhi riots cases, out of the 93 cases which resulted in acquittals.

He had argued that Khalid has spent five years in custody in the Delhi riots larger conspiracy case, calling it a “joke of an FIR.”

Khalid was arrested in the case by the Delhi Police on September 13, 2020. He was recently denied bail in the case by a division bench of the Delhi High Court on September 02.

He has approached the Supreme Court challenging denial of his bail. The matter is listed for hearing on October 27.

Vide the impugned order, the Delhi High Court also denied bail to co-accused Sharjeel Imam, Athar Khan, Khalid Saifi, Mohd Saleem Khan, Shifa ur Rehman, Meeran Haider, Gulfisha Fatima and Shadab Ahmed. A different bench also denied bail to co accused Tasleem Ahmed.

In its order, the High Court observed that prima facie, the role of Sharjeel Imam and Umar Khalid in the entire conspiracy is “grave”, having delivered inflammatory speeches on communal lines to “instigate mass mobilization of members of the Muslim community.”

It further said that the trial need only progress naturally, as a “hurried trial” will be detrimental both to the accused and the State.

FIR 59 of 2020 was registered by Delhi Police's Special Cell under various offences under the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967.

The other accused in the case are Tahir Hussain, Khalid Saifi, Isharat Jahan, Meeran Haider, Shifa-Ur-Rehman, Asif Iqbal Tanha, Shadab Ahmed, Tasleem Ahmed, Saleem Malik, Mohd. Saleem Khan, Athar Khan, Safoora Zargar, Sharjeel Imam, Devangana Kalita, Faizan Khan and Natasha Narwal.

In June 2020, Safoora Zargar was given bail on humanitarian grounds on account of her pregnancy. In June 2021, the High Court, on merits, granted bail to three other accused - Asif Iqbal Tanha, Devangana Kalita, and Natasha Narwal.