Court defers taking cognizance of riots conspiracy charge sheet against Khalid, Imam

The Delhi High Court had stayed the trial in the case on November 11 while hearing Delhi Police’s appeal, challenging a trial court order of supplying hard copies of the charge sheet to all suspects.
Former JNU student Umar Khalid.(Vipin Kumar/HT PHOTO)
Former JNU student Umar Khalid.(Vipin Kumar/HT PHOTO)
Updated on Nov 24, 2020 07:23 AM IST
Copy Link
Hindustan Times, New Delhi | ByRicha Banka

A Delhi court on Monday deferred the hearing on the issue of taking cognisance of the supplementary charge sheet in the conspiracy to trigger communal riots in north east Delhi which names Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam and Faizan Khan. The charge sheet was filed on Sunday.

The Delhi High Court had stayed the trial in the case on November 11 while hearing Delhi Police’s appeal, challenging a trial court order of supplying hard copies of the charge sheet to all suspects.

Additional sessions judge Amitabh Rawat reserved the order for Tuesday, saying the court’s order has to be correct in terms of the high court’s directions.

In the supplementary charge sheet filed on Sunday, Imam and Khalid were booked under the stringent Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act and other sections of the Indian Penal Code, Arms Act and Prevention of Damage to Public Properties Act.

In its November 11 order, the HC had said that the trial court is at liberty to decide any application in the case and put up the matter for further hearing on December 15.

During the hearing, counsel for some of the accused said that the grievance of the prosecutor was with the supply of physical copies of the bulky main charge sheet and so soft copies of the supplementary charge sheet can be supplied now.

Special Public Prosecutor Amit Prasad, appearing for the police, said the prosecution was willing to provide soft copies of the supplementary charge sheet to the accused but the orders have to come from the court. He, however, said if the court passes any such directions for supply of the charge sheet, then the police can challenge it before the high court.

The police had challenged the October 21 order of the trial court where it had refused to grant time to the police to obtain funds’ sanction to provide to the accused hard copies of the voluminous charge sheet and directed to provide the same.

While both Khalid and Imam are in custody, the Supreme Court confirmed bail for Faizan Khan in another riots related case on Monday. Khan was released on bail by the high court on October 23, after it found no ground to directly link him with the commission of offence. Khan was charged under the UAPA in March this year and was accused of arranging SIM card for a co-accused Asif Iqbal Tanha.

According to the police, this number was used to communicate messages by students of the Jamia Coordination Committee (JCC), who too were charged for instigating the February riots in protest to the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) passed by Parliament in December last year.

Meanwhile, Khalid, on Monday alleged before chief metropolitan magistrate Dinesh Kumar that his custody in connection to a case related to riots at Khajuri Khas was extended “illegally” and “mechanically”.

Khalid was arrested in this case on October 1. Appearing for Khalid, his counsel Sanya Kumar told the court that since the beginning of his arrest in the case, his lawyers were not given copies of the remand applications and denied information about when and before which judge he would be produced.

“Time and time again the remand was mechanically granted. Case diaries were not signed, we were not supplied a copy of the remand application,” she claimed.

The application by advocates Trideep Pais and Kumar, sought directions to the investigating agency as well as the jail authorities to provide a copy of the application seeking remand/extension of remand to Khalid’s counsels in advance to the proceedings.

He was sent to police custody for three days and on October 4, he was sent to judicial custody for 14 days which was extended on October 18 and further on October 31.

Khalid’s counsel further alleged that despite repeated requests to inform them about where those remand proceedings would happen and before which judge, the police only informed them that it would happen at Tis Hazari district courts complex and around 11 am and did not give any further information.Kumar then got the details from the court.

The plea had sought directions to the police to intimate the counsels about the time, place and manner of all future remand proceedings for Khalid one day in advance.

The court has put up the matter for further hearing on November 27.

SHARE THIS ARTICLE ON
Close Story
SHARE
Story Saved
×
Saved Articles
Following
My Reads
Sign out
New Delhi 0C
Wednesday, January 19, 2022