Sharjeel Imam says he quit CAA protests before 2020 Delhi riots

Imam’s counsel argued that the prosecution’s case showed that Imam was sidelined midway through the agitation

Student activist Sharjeel Imam on Thursday told a Delhi court that he had withdrawn from the protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) in the capital well before violence broke out in northeast Delhi in February 2020, arguing that police claimed that several co-accused had asked him to step away because they said his speeches were giving a “communal colour” to the movement and could harm it.

The arguments mark a significant shift in the case, as this is the first time Imam has sought to distance himself from the other co-accused.

Appearing before additional sessions judge Sameer Bajpai at Karkardooma Courts, Imam’s counsel, advocate Talib Mustafa, argued that the prosecution’s case showed that Imam left the protest midway through the agitation and had no role in any alleged conspiracy behind the February 2020 riots.

“According to the prosecution, co-accused stated that the protest was turning communal and that I was the most renowned figure among them who was giving it that colour. So, I withdrew from the movement by January 2. Till then, there was no violence,” Mustafa submitted.

The arguments mark a significant shift in the case, as this is the first time Imam has sought to distance himself from the other co-accused. The submissions also came two days after the Supreme Court rejected Imam’s bail plea, holding that he and fellow accused Umar Khalid had played a central role in orchestrating the conspiracy that allegedly led to the riots.

Seeking to further distance Imam from the alleged escalation of protests, Mustafa claimed Imam was never part of the Delhi Police Support Group (DPSG) WhatsApp group, which the prosecution claims was used by other accused to coordinate chakka jams and renewed mobilisation. Imam, he said, had created a separate group – Muslim Students of Jamia (MSJ) – solely for peaceful protest against CAA.

Imam also rejected the prosecution’s claim that the protests were timed to coincide with then US President Donald Trump’s February 2020 visit to India, arguing that Trump’s schedule was made public only after he was arrested on January 28. “By the time the direction of the protest allegedly changed, I was already in custody,” the counsel submitted.

In a pointed submission, the defence specifically distanced Imam from former JNU student Umar Khalid, rejecting the police’s claim that Khalid had mentored Imam. “There is no call record or meeting to show that I was mentored by Umar Khalid. We had not spoken for almost six years on campus,” Mustafa told the court.

The arguments come shortly after the Supreme Court refused bail to Imam and Khalid in the alleged conspiracy case. A bench of justices Aravind Kumar and N V Anjaria held on January 5 that the gravity and statutory nature of the offences, coupled with their “central and formative roles” in the conspiracy, disentitled them to relief at this stage.

At the same time, the top court granted bail to five co-accused – Gulfisha Fatima, Meeran Haider, Shifa-ur-Rehman, Mohd Saleem Khan and Shadab Ahmed – observing that their continued incarceration was not shown to be indispensable for a fair trial, given the subsidiary nature of the allegations against them and subject to stringent conditions.

As many as 18 accused are facing prosecution in the case, which pertains to an alleged coordinated conspiracy culminating in communal violence in northeast Delhi in February 2020 that left 53 people dead and hundreds injured. Eleven of the accused are currently out on bail.