Delhi pogrom conspiracy case accused and human rights defender Khalid Saifi on Tuesday questioned the Delhi High Court on whether “innocuous messages” could justify charges under the draconian Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) and be a reason to deny him bail.
“Can UAPA charges be based on innocuous messages or mere interpretations of them? Can such claims justify denying me bail?” asks Senior advocate Rebecca John, representing Saifi before Bench of Justices Navin Chawla and Shalinder Kaur.
The HC was hearing bail petitions of Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam, Saifi and several others booked under the draconian UAPA and other IPC sections in the 2020 North East Delhi violence larger conspiracy case.
Delhi Police while filing its submission relied on some allegedly incriminatory messages exchanged between Saifi and protesters on WhatsApp groups, Saifi’s lawyer argued.
She also sought parity with the co-accused – Devangana Kalita, Natasha Narwal and Asif Iqbal Tanha – who are out on bail in the case, and said a speedy trial was a constitutionally protected right which ought to be considered.
“Delay is a fact that can be considered by a constitutional court notwithstanding the provisions prohibiting bail.. When you have such an onerous provision, it is the duty of court to see whether protest against what was seen as an unfair law tantamounts to terrorist act,” said John.
This story was originally published in maktoobmedia.com. Read the full story here.
