2020 riots: SC defers to Oct 31 hearing on bail pleas of Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam
New Delhi (PTI): The Supreme Court on Monday deferred to October 31 hearing on bail pleas of activists Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam, Gulfisha Fatima and Meeran Haider in the UAPA case related to the alleged conspiracy behind the February 2020 riots in Delhi.
A bench of Justices Aravind Kumar and N V Anjaria adjourned the matter after Additional Solicitor General S V Raju sought time.
Raju sought two weeks time to file reply in the case but the top court said it would hear the matter on Friday.
"Frankly speaking, in bail matters there is no question of filing counter," the bench said.
The top court on September 22 had issued notice to the Delhi Police and sought its response.
The activists have moved the apex court challenging the Delhi High Court order passed on September 2.
The high court denied bail to nine people, including Khalid and Imam, saying "conspiratorial" violence under the garb of demonstrations or protests by citizens could not be allowed.
Besides Khalid and Imam, those who faced bail rejection are Fatima, Haider, Mohd Saleem Khan, Shifa Ur Rehman, Athar Khan, Abdul Khalid Saifi and Shadab Ahmed.
The bail plea of another accused, Tasleem Ahmed, was rejected by a different high court bench on September 2.
The high court said the Constitution affords citizens the right to protest and carry out demonstrations or agitations, provided they are orderly, peaceful and without arms, and such actions must be within the bounds of law.
While the high court said the right to participate in peaceful protests and to make speeches in public meetings was said to have been protected under Article 19(1)(a), and couldn't be blatantly curtailed, it observed the right was "not absolute" and "subject to reasonable restrictions".
"If the exercise of an unfettered right to protest were permitted, it would damage the constitutional framework and impinge upon the law and order situation in the country," the bail rejection order said.
Khalid, Imam and the rest of the accused persons were booked under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) and provisions of the erstwhile IPC for allegedly being the "masterminds" of the February 2020 riots, which left 53 people dead and over 700 injured.
The violence erupted during the protests against the Citizenship (Amendment) Act and the National Register of Citizens.
The accused, who have denied all the allegations against them, have been in jail since 2020 and had moved the high court after a trial court rejected their bail pleas.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
SC refuses plea against Andhra Pradesh govt panel reviewing SIT report on Tirumala laddu row
New Delhi (PTI): In a significant development, the Supreme Court on Monday declined to restrain a one-member committee appointed by the Andhra Pradesh government from reviewing an independent Special Investigation Team's (SIT) report on the Tirumala laddu controversy.
The top court, on October 4, 2024, had set up the five-member independent SIT to probe the allegations of animal fat used in preparing Tirupati laddus to "assuage the feelings of crores of people", while making clear that the court cannot be used as a "political battleground".
On Monday, a bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymala Bagchi was told by Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader Subramanian Swamy that the state government's decision to appoint the one-member committee amounts to setting up a parallel inquiry that would affect the SIT's probe. The plea also assailed statements made by Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister N Chandrababu Naidu on the row.
Rejecting the submissions, the CJI noted that the SIT probe is already over and the matter is sub-judice as two chargesheets, including a supplementary one, have been submitted in the court.
"Such an administrative enquiry cannot be called as overlapping with the criminal proceedings which led to the chargesheet and the supplementary chargesheet," the CJI said.
"There is no conflict of interest/overlapping, and the scope of the investigation/enquiry, having been well demarcated, shows that apprehension of the petitioner does not have a solid foundation. Let both processes continue strictly in accordance with the law," the court said.
Swamy argued that the state government's move undermines the authority of the SIT, constituted earlier by the Supreme Court itself to probe irregularities surrounding the laddus distributed by the Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams (TTD).
During the proceedings, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta said the SIT has completed its investigation and filed its final report.
He underlined that according to the Central Bureau of Investigation's (CBI) manual, if administrative lapses not connected to a criminal matter are found during a probe, then those have to be intimated to the state government, and as the SIT has found certain administrative lapses, the Andhra Pradesh government's panel is looking into those.
The panel replaced the state government's SIT, constituted on September 26, 2024, following the politically-sensitive row over the alleged use of animal fat in the laddus.
The controversy erupted after Naidu's claim that animal fat was used in preparing Tirupati laddus during the previous Y S Jagan Mohan Reddy-led regime in the southern state.
The YSR Congress Party has accused Naidu of levelling "heinous allegations" against it for political gains, while the ruling Telugu Desam Party in the state has circulated a laboratory report to back its claim.
A batch of pleas, including those seeking a court-monitored probe into the alleged use of animal fat in making the laddus, was then filed in the apex court.
