Sharjeel Imam tells SC that he is not a terrorist, seeks bail in Delhi riots case

Activist Sharjeel Imam, on Tuesday (December 2), while seeking bail in the February 2020 Delhi riots case, told the Supreme Court that he was not a terrorist, contrary to being labelled as a "dangerous intellectual terrorist" by the police.

"I would like to say that I am not a terrorist, as I have been called by the respondent (police). I am not an anti-national as called by the State. I am a citizen of this country, a citizen by birth, and I have not been convicted for any offence till now," senior advocate Siddhartha Dave, appearing for Imam, said.

‘Arrested before Delhi riots’

During the hearing by a bench of Justices Aravind Kumar and N V Anjariak, Dave further stated the activist was arrested on January 28, 2020, which was before the riots, for his speeches, which alone cannot constitute the "criminal conspiracy" offence in the riots case.

Also Read: 2020 riots: SC defers to Oct 31 hearing on bail pleas of Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam

"I am being prosecuted for speeches I gave, snippets of which were played in court. This FIR was registered in March 2020. For over a month, I had already been in custody. This FIR is registered for conspiracy, for riots that were committed in February 2020. Of course, it rules out my physical presence in the riots because I was in custody,” he said.

"If they have taken me in custody in January, they could have said these speeches led to the riots. But I am not named as an accused. My speeches by themselves did not lead to riots. I was already being prosecuted for those speeches," he added.

What Supreme Court said

However, at this point, the bench asked about the police's case that Imam's speeches were part of an alleged plan that "created a platform for riots to take place so that the conspiracy gets fructified".

Justice Kumar asked, "Can we take your argument that these speeches won't constitute a terrorist act?”

Dave responded, saying that the speeches will not constitute the "criminal conspiracy" and the police will have to show that there is something more Imam did for conspiracy.

Also Read: Sharjeel Imam withdraws interim bail plea to contest Bihar polls

"I would like to say that I am not a terrorist, as I have been called by the respondent (police). I am not an anti-national as called by the State. I am a citizen of this country, a citizen by birth, and I have not been convicted for any offence till now,” he said.

"I am being labelled as a dangerous intellectual terrorist. Additional Solicitor General said intellectual terrorists are more dangerous. Not one conviction against me. The words were used against a citizen of this country. I can understand after a full-fledged trial because I lose the presumption of innocence. But this label has caused anguish to me," Dave submitted.

‘Umar Khalid not in Delhi during riots’

Appearing for appearing for Umar Khalid, senior advocate Kapil Sibal submitted that he was not in Delhi when the riots happened in February 2020, and that he cannot be kept incarcerated "as if to say that I will punish you for your protests".

"You cannot attribute someone else's speech to me and say I am responsible for the riots," Sibal submitted.

Also Read: TISS students booked for holding event to mark Prof GN Saibaba's death anniversary

"I ask myself, I am an academic in an institution. What can I do to overthrow the State?" he said.

Sibal played in court Khalid’s February 17, 2020, speech delivered in Amravati and said he spoke of responding to violence with peace and to hatred with love. "How is this a violation of the UAPA? Sibal asked.

‘Amravati speech not communal’

He claimed that nothing in the Amravati speech is communal in nature. “Nobody can call his speech inflammatory in any sense of the word," the senior lawyer added.

"These are students who agitated wrongly or rightly on certain issues. In our younger days even we used to agitate. Some of my friends from St. Stephen's College actually joined the Naxal movement, but we did not.

Also Read: SC seeks Delhi police response on bail for Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam

"There is no use putting me in jail and for what? If you have a case against me, prosecute me or convict me and send me to jail. You can't keep me incarcerated as if to say that I will punish you for your protests," Sibal said.

‘Can’t be subjected to endless custody’: Gulfisha Fatima

Stressing that she cannot be subjected to "endless custody", activist Gulfisha Fatima told the apex court that Delhi Police's claim of a coordinated “regime change operation” finds no mention in its chargesheet.

Also Read: SC defers bail pleas of Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam in Delhi riots case till Sept 22

Senior advocate Abhishek Singhvi, appearing for Fatima, told a bench of Justices Aravind Kumar and N V Anjaria that the activist has spent under six years in incarceration and termed the delay in the trial “astonishing and unprecedented”.

(With agency inputs)