The Supreme Court.(HT File Photo)
The Supreme Court.(HT File Photo)

Supreme Court refuses to stay HC order granting bail to 3 students in Delhi riots case

"The issue is important. It has pan India ramifications and so we would like to issue notice and decide the matter for the good of the country," the Supreme Court said.
By hindustantimes.com, Hindustan Times, New Delhi
PUBLISHED ON JUN 18, 2021 01:41 PM IST

The Supreme Court said on Friday the decision on the bail for Asif Iqbal Tanha, Natasha Narwal and Devangana Kalita, released on Thursday night after spending more than a year in jail over alleged links to the violence in northeast Delhi last year, has "pan-India ramifications."

"The issue is important. It has pan-India ramifications and so we would like to issue notice and decide the matter for the good of the country," the Supreme Court said.

The top court also issued a notice on Delhi Police's appeal challenging the remarks made by the Delhi High Court while granting bail to activists Devangana Kalita, Natasha Narwal and Asif Iqbal Tanha.

The Supreme Court held that the order will not be treated as a precedent and the same shall not be relied upon by any parties in the case before any proceedings in any Court. The top court clarified that it has not interfered with the bail granted to the three accused at this stage. The matter will be taken up after July 19.

A Delhi HC bench comprising Justices Siddharth Mridul and AJ Bhambhani on Thursday passed the release orders for Natasha Narwal and Devangana Kalita, students of the Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) and Jamia Millia Islamia student Asif Iqbal Tanha. The three were granted bail previously on Tuesday by the Delhi HC regarding the northeast Delhi riots.

In its bail order on Tuesday, the Delhi High Court said that the allegations against the three students do not prima facie disclose the commission of any offense under sections of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA). The court also rules that the additional restrictions on the grant of bail also does not apply. The court further said that the line between terrorist activity and the constitutionally guaranteed right to protest is getting "somewhat blurred" in the mind of the State, "in its anxiety to suppress dissent."

SHARE THIS ARTICLE ON
Close
SHARE
Story Saved
OPEN APP