New Delhi: Denial of bail to Jawaharlal Lal University (JNU) student Sharjeel Imam in the sedition case registered against him for allegedly making inflammatory speeches and inciting violence during the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) – National Register of Citizens (NRC) In the first protests in 2019, a Delhi court on Friday said that freedom of expression cannot be used at the cost of communal peace and harmony.
Additional Sessions Judge Anuj Agarwal, who rejected the JNU student’s bail plea, however, noted the evidence in support of the allegation that the rioters were incited by his speech and that the police then attacked the party, causing mischief, assault. The acts involved were very few. and sketchy, PTI reported.
Reading: ISRO espionage case: Kerala High Court extends anticipatory bail of former DGP Sibi Mathews
The judge, in his order, said that the summarizing and direct speech shows that it was clearly on communal lines.
The judge said that the tone and tone of incendiary speech has a bad effect on the peace, tranquility and harmony of the society.
“There is no point in saying that the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression cannot be exercised at the cost of communal peace and harmony of the society,” the judge said.
According to police, the JNU student had earlier allegedly made a provocative speech on December 13, 2019, which resulted in riots two days later when a mob of over 3,000 people attacked police personnel in Jamia Nagar area of South Delhi. Several vehicles were set on fire. .
Imam claimed that the police instigated a particular religious community against the central government by instilling unfounded fear in their minds over CAA and NRC.
Highlighting a portion of the JNU student’s alleged inflammatory speech in the copy of the order, while rejecting his bail, the court maintained evidence in support of the allegations that Imam’s speech incited rioters was short and sketchy. .
The court observed that neither any eyewitness has been cited by the prosecution nor any other evidence on record that the co-accused was abetted and committed the alleged act of rioting by listening to Imam’s speech.
Observing that there is no evidence to substantiate the prosecutor’s version that the alleged rioters were part of the audience addressed by Imam on December 13, 2019, the court observed that the essential link between the date of the speech and the subsequent acts was clearly visible. missing from.
The court further observed that there are many holes in the theory propounded by the investigating agency, which leaves an incomplete picture unless the gap is bridged by resorting to conjectures and conjectures or essentially by relying on the disclosure statements of Iman and Thar co-accused. is filled.
read also: SC sends notice to former Twitter India head of UP Police over video of Ghaziabad attack
While pronouncing the verdict, the judge said, quoting Swami Vivekananda: “We are what our thoughts have made us; so be mindful of what you think; words are secondary; thoughts remain; they travel far “
The JNU student, apart from this case, has also been accused of being the “mastermind” of the February 2020 riots and booked under the stringent Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA).
.