New Delhi, The Delhi High Court has observed that there is no justification not to grant bail to student activist Sharjeel Imam in connection with a 2020 communal riots case.
According to Kashmir Media Service, the Court remarked that the prosecution failed to provide any “justifiable reason” to deny bail to Imam in the case involving allegations of sedition and unlawful activities. The trial court had been “swayed by the enormity of the allegations” while denying him bail. A bench headed by Justice Suresh Kumar Kait, which granted bail to Imam on May 29, more than four years after his arrest, stated in its recently uploaded order that the seriousness of the allegations alone cannot be a ground to decline bail under section 436-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure. This section is intended to prevent undertrial prisoners from being detained in jail beyond half of the maximum sentence provided for such offenses unless there are rational and logical reasons to direct otherwise.
“In the case in hand, we do not find any justifiable reason which could have compelled the court from not granting the relief,” the court said. The bench, also comprising Justice Manoj Jain, noted that the trial court had been influenced by the severity of the allegations, particularly the claim that Imam’s inflammatory speeches resulted in riots, leading to the denial of bail.
The prosecution alleged that Imam made speeches at Jamia Millia Islamia on December 13, 2019, and at Aligarh Muslim University on December 16, 2019, where he threatened to cut off Assam and the rest of the northeast from the country. In 2022, the trial court framed charges against him under sections 124A (sedition), 153A (promoting enmity), 153B (imputations prejudicial to national integration), 505 (statements conducing to public mischief) of the IPC, and section 13 (punishment for unlawful activities) of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, an anti-terror law.
The activist’s lawyer argued in the high court that material witnesses were yet to be examined and that the trial could not be concluded due to the Supreme Court’s suspension of the operation of IPC section 124A (sedition). While granting bail, the court dismissed the Delhi Police’s objection that the delay was solely attributable to Imam, noting that the trial was stayed in 2022 at his instance. The court stated that any accused who chooses to avail legal remedy cannot be blamed for causing delay, and in this case, the stay order was based on joint statements from the parties and was not further challenged by the State.