Prosecution trying to communalise Delhi riots UAPA case, Khalid Saifi told court
United Against Hate (UAH) founder Khalid Saifi, who is charged in a UAPA case in the North East Delhi riots case, through his lawyer, told a Delhi court on Wednesday that the The prosecution was trying to communitarize the story of the riots.
The bail applications were made by lead attorney Rebecca John who appeared on Saifi’s behalf before Extra Sessions Judge Amitabh Rawat. The court will issue its order on the bail’s arguments once its rebuttals to the prosecution’s arguments are complete.
Regarding the allegations that Saifi attended a protest site at Jantar Mantar, John told the court: “Jantar Mantar was a protest site open to the public, nothing secret about it. Since time immemorial, people have gone there to voice their grievances.
On the allegations that Saifi met Umar Khalid, John told the court that there was no evidence about it. Regarding the prosecution‘s claim that Saifi addressed a meeting, John said: “Assuming that is true, even then it is not strong evidence that can support their conspiracy story. .”
John then read messages from the WhatsApp group, DPSG, in which participants had mentioned how they should protest outside the CM’s office against police inaction.
“How this incriminates me is beyond my reasoning or imagination. I own the message. The message only says that the police were unable to control the riots and that there should be accountability. Even though I asked the CM to hold a press conference, it is within my rights as an Indian citizen,” John told the court.
On the prosecution’s allegations that this protest was communal, inorganic and a conspiracy of silence, John told the court: “Every protest is organized. Even if it wasn’t organic, it didn’t help their case… The protest wasn’t communal except that the people who were against the bill belonged to a particular community.
John told the court that the prosecutor was selectively reading WhatsApp chats. “Either you read it together or you don’t. But I object to the prosecution’s attempt to remove messages in isolation. In the same chat, there are posts about Delhi police and paramilitary forces attacking peaceful protesters. Why is the prosecution trying to communitarize the story? Don’t leave the story to one community. Don’t discount the actions of the Delhi Police, that’s also apparent from reading this WhatsApp group,” John told the court.
John then told the court that they should read the messages in the group and take the literal meaning and not give meaning to those messages. “We have to take the messages for what they are. The prosecution basing its arguments on conjectures, inferences is inadmissible in law.
John told the court that the prosecution was conducting the whole case based on WhatsApp chats and concluded the hearing by saying: ‘Conspiracies are hatched in silence, but conspiracies are not silent. Convincing evidence must be presented even for a conspiracy.