While opposing the bail plea of Umar Khalid before the High Court, the Delhi Police on Monday said that he was desperate to give speech at Amaravati though the permission was not granted by Maharashtra Police. It argued that a wrong narrative was being tried to set by flashing wrong messages in the DPSG.
A division bench of justices Sidharth Mridul and Rajanish Bhatnagar after hearing the arguments adjourned the hearing till tomorrow. This case is connected with the larger conspiracy of the North East Delhi riots. Special public prosecutor (SPP) Amit Prasad submitted before the bench that the date of Trump’s visit was declared on February 11, 2020, and after that Umar Khalid was desperate to give a speech at Amaravati on February 17, 2020.
He submitted that permission was not granted for the programme by Maharashtra authorities as the name of Umar Khalid was there in the list of speakers. Another application filed on February 12, 2020, by the office bearer of the Welfare Party of India (WPI) was allowed by the authorities only for six speakers. The name of Umar Khalid was not there on the list of speakers. WPI is headed by his father.
Despite the no permission Umar Khalid participated in the program and gave a speech there on February 17, 2020. It shows his desperation, SPP added. SPP Amit Prasad also argued that after the news of the killing of a police officer at Jafrabad by a website on February 24, 2020, there was panic in the DPSG group. There was a message from Rahul Roy to Umar Khalid to call him but he did not respond.
Umar Khalid attended a meeting at Jafrabad on the night of 22 January 2020. Natasha Narwal was the person of responsibility for the Jafrabad Seelampur protest site, SPP added. SPP argued that Umar Khalid was at Samastipur, Bihar from there he made a call to Natasha Narwal in the evening. Thereafter there was a flurry of calls between the conspirators. Thereafter all the main conspirators assembled in the New Delhi area. He said that Umar Khalid who was masking himself, started to respond after the news of the killing of a police officer came in. Though the killing took place at another place.
He also showed through WhatsApp chats that Tasleem was directly reporting to Umar Khalid, though the person of responsibility was Natasha Narwal. Tasleem also informed us about roadblocks in Jafrabad. During the arguments through the PowerPoint presentation (PPT), Amit Prasad showed that there were two meetings in Chandbagh which were attended by Athar Khan and other accused. He also showed the dislocation and disconnection of CCTV cameras in the Chandbagh area. It was also shown that Saleem Malik alias Munna, Salim Khan and others were involved in this act. He also showed footage of Ibrahim carrying a sword.
SPP further argued that DPSG, which was a closed group and only persons of responsibility were members of it, it was open after the violence and people from outside were added. Rahul Roy deleted four members including Athar Khan from the group. A wrong narrative was being tried to set up by flashing the wrong message in the DPSG. One of which read there were RSS goons on the protest site. Lawyers and media mobilisation is needed. Another message was that there was a police Lathi’s charge on the protest site.
During the hearing on August 1, the prosecution had said that the North East Delhi riots were the results of a larger conspiracy and the idea was to create a sense of fear in the minds of Muslims and to paralyse the city. The senior advocate appearing for Umar Khalid had concluded his arguments on the bail plea. He submitted that no case of conspiracy is made out against his client and there are major contradictions in the statement of witnesses.
The said the objectionable speech was allegedly given by Umar in Amaravati on 17 February 2020. He was booked under UAPA by Delhi Police and was arrested on 13 September 2020. Senior Advocate Tridip Pais had argued that there is no material, no basis for allegations in the charge sheet. It is based on hearsay.
During the argument on May 23, 2022, he argued that Sharjeel Imam had criticized a secular movement against CAA and Khalid does not agree with it. Pais had said, ” I am (Umar Khalid) being lumped with a person who calls for a deeply communal protest against CAA. There is no ideological meeting of minds.”