Blockade call not sedition, says Sharjeel Imam’s lawyer

The speeches in question were made at Jamia Millia Islamia in Delhi on December 13, 2019, and at the Aligarh Muslim University on December 16, 2019.

Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) student Sharjeel Imam, arrested for allegedly making inflammatory speeches during protests against the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, or CAA, told a Delhi court on Monday that he cannot be booked for sedition because none of his statements directly or indirectly called for violence.

Sharjeel Imam is accused of offences relating to sedition, promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, imputations prejudicial to national integration, and public mischief under the Indian Penal Code, and indulging in unlawful activities under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act. (HT Photo)

Imam, while seeking bail in a case related to speeches he made at two universities in 2019 where he allegedly threatened to “cut off” Assam and the rest of the Northeast from India, through his counsel Tanveer Ahmed Mir contended that the right to protest, the right to blockade, and the right to bring the country to a standstill is not equal to an act of sedition.

“The speech did not call for violence. He just called for a road blockade. He did not say that the northeast should become a different state and declare independence. That would have been seditious,” Mir told additional sessions judge Amitabh Rawat.

He added, “What society will be a society if it’s not robust or what doesn’t react. It will be a heap of sheep.”

“When Sharjeel Imam says that this piece of legislation is unconstitutional, and seeks to persuade the government to rethink and says if you don’t do it, we will be on the streets, he cannot be hammered by sedition,” Mir contended.

The speeches in question were made at Jamia Millia Islamia in Delhi on December 13, 2019, and at the Aligarh Muslim University on December 16, 2019. He has been in judicial custody since January 28, 2020.

Imam is accused of offences relating to sedition, promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, imputations prejudicial to national integration, and public mischief under the Indian Penal Code, and indulging in unlawful activities under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, or UAPA.

Delhi Police filed a charge sheet against Imam in the case, in which it alleged that he allegedly gave speeches inciting hatred, contempt, and disaffection towards the central government and instigated the people, which led to the violence outside Jamia Millia Islamia in December 2019.

Mir argued that he was ‘astounded’ to see the investigating officer calling his client bigoted just because he seems to criticise the Constitution of India.

“We are proud of our unity and not majoritarianism. Critical elements in our society are also necessary because in a society where criticism will die, the society will die. That is why, ultimately, the flag to uphold the Constitution in a democracy securely lies in Your Honour’s hands,” he said.

“Fundamentally the right to protest, bring the country to a standstill is not at any point in time equal to an act of sedition. We went together through the contents of the speech. The petitioner at no point of time has said that you should resort to violence,” he asserted.