Sharjeel Imam hearing: Delhi court issues summons to DCP
A Delhi court has issued summons to the deputy commissioner of police (crime) to appear before the court in the bail application of Sharjeel Imam in a sedition case. The court has listed the matter for December 9. The court observed that the absence of the special public prosecutor is causing witnesses to be discharged without examination. Sharjeel had sought bail under section 436A of CrPC in the case filed against him for allegedly making inflammatory speeches during the anti-CAA protests.
A Delhi court on Saturday, while taking up the bail application moved by Sharjeel Imam in a sedition case, issued summons to the deputy commissioner of police (crime) to appear before the court after a passover was sought by the prosecution citing that link special public prosecutor (SPP) Madhukar Pandey was preoccupied in another case.
The court has now listed the matter for December 9.
The court observed that it has become a regular occurrence that proxy counsel for the SPP, Amit Prasad, seek passovers during the day citing engagement in other cases.
The court also noted that the absence of the SPP is also causing the witnesses in the riots cases to be discharged without examination. “This tendency to seek a pass over/date while always stating pre-occupation in other cases in other courts on a regular basis leads to derailment of cases in this court,” said additional sessions judge (ASJ) Amitabh Rawat.
Sharjeel had sought bail under section 436A of Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) in the case filed against him for allegedly making inflammatory speeches in various parts of Delhi during the anti-Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA) protests.
Section 436A of CrPC describes the maximum period for which an undertrial prisoner can be detained. According to the section a person, accused of an offence, shall be granted bail by the court if he has undergone half of the maximum period of imprisonment specified for the offence.
On March 15, 2022, the court framed charges against him under section 124A (sedition), 153A (promoting enmity between different groups on ground of religion, race, place of birth, etc.), 153B (imputations, assertions prejudicial to national integration) and 505 (statement conducing public mischief) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and section 13 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA).
Advocate Talib Mustafa argued on his behalf that during the pendency of the trial the constitutional validity of sedition was challenged before the Supreme Court.
He added that considering the directions passed by the Supreme Court on May 11, 2022, the only sections remaining against him were sections 153A, 153B, 505 of the IPC with a maximum imprisonment of three years and section 13 of UAPA in which the maximum imprisonment is of seven years.
He argued that he has completed more than three years and six months, half of seven years.
The submissions were opposed by the SPP arguing that the punishment for the offences is calculated consecutively and not concurrently.
Sharjeel was initially booked in this case for the offence of sedition and other related offences by the Delhi Police crime branch under FIR 20 of 2022. Later section 13 of the UAPA was also invoked against him. He was arrested in the case on January 28, 2020.