Delhi Court Denies Bail to Former AAP MLA and Two Others in 2020 Riots Conspiracy Case
A Delhi court on Thursday firmly rejected the bail applications of former Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) legislator Tahir Hussain and two other individuals in the larger conspiracy case connected to the February 2020 northeast Delhi communal riots. The court observed that a prima facie case has been established against Hussain, Salim Malik, and Athar Khan under the stringent Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), leaving no room for a fresh opinion that could review the earlier order.
Statutory Bar Under UAPA Continues to Operate
Additional Sessions Judge Sameer Bajpai dismissed the pleas through three separate bail orders, emphasizing that the statutory bar on bail under Section 43D(5) of the UAPA continued to be in effect. This provision imposes strict conditions for granting bail in cases involving unlawful activities, making it particularly challenging for the accused to secure release.
Defence Arguments and Court's Counterpoints
The defence team heavily relied on the Supreme Court's January 5 order, which granted bail to co-accused individuals including Shifa-ur-Rehman, Gulfisha Fatima, Salim Khan, Meeran Haider, and Shadab Ahmed. They sought parity based on this precedent. However, the court pointed out that bail had been denied to other accused, such as Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam, in the same case. The apex court had previously clarified that "all the accused in the case do not stand on the same footing", indicating that each case must be evaluated on its own merits.
Counsel for the accused also argued that their clients had been in custody for nearly six years, and charges were yet to be framed. Hussain's legal representative submitted that "even if charges are framed in the near future, the trial will take a long time", citing the need to examine approximately 950 witnesses, which could prolong the judicial process significantly.
Prosecution's Stance and Allegations
The prosecution, however, countered these arguments by asserting that the bail pleas were "in the nature of a review petition" and, therefore, not maintainable. They emphasized that prima facie accusations clearly demonstrate the involvement of Hussain, Malik, and Khan with the main conspirators in the case. Delhi Police has accused these individuals, along with others, of engaging in terror activities and conspiring to commit violence during the 2020 riots, leading to the invocation of the UAPA.
Earlier this month, the Supreme Court granted bail to five accused in the same case while denying relief to Khalid and Imam, highlighting the nuanced approach taken by the judiciary in such high-profile matters. The court's decision underscores the gravity of the allegations and the ongoing legal scrutiny surrounding the 2020 Delhi riots, which resulted in significant loss of life and property.
