Distressing, Unjust: Legal Experts on High Court's Denial of Bail to Umar Khalid

After the Delhi High Court on Tuesday, 18 October, denied bail to former JNU student Umar Khalid arrested under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), in connection with the 2020 Delhi riots larger 'conspiracy' case, legal experts lamented the decision.In conversation with The Quint, Former Judge of Patna High Court and Senior Advocate at the Supreme Court Anjana Prakash, called the denial of bail 'distressing' and criticised the UAPA."This is really distressing and ridiculous. In UAPA cases, the onus to prove their innocence is on the accused. This is a ridiculous position. In a pre-trial stage, how is one supposed to prove their innocence?"Case Recap: Over 2 Years in Jail Under UAPA, Will Umar Khalid Finally Get Bail?"Bail is the rule, jail is always the exception but in UAPA cases that gets overturned," she added.Dismissing the bail plea, a bench of Justices Siddharth Mridul and Rajnish Bhatnagar said: "We don't find any merit in the bail appeal."Khalid has been charged under the stringent Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) and has spent over 700 days in prison so far. The order comes over a month after the bench reserved its decision on 9 September. Find details of the Delhi High Court's hearing in Umar Khalid's bail plea here.The court, referring to Khalid's use of the word revolution in his speeches, observed, according to LiveLaw, that:"So, when we use the expression "revolution‟, it is not necessarily bloodless. This court is reminded of that although, the activity of "revolution" in its essential quality may not be different but from the point of view of Robespierre and Pandit Nehru, in its potentiality and in its effect upon public tranquility there can be a vast difference."Reacting to the court's observations on revolution, Senior Advocate at the Supreme Court Sanjay Hegde told The Quint:"Given the harshness of the UAPA law, denial of bail may not be surprising but the court went overboard with its observations on revolution. Those comments were beyond the merits of the case." "Going by the Delhi High Court's logic, freedom fighter Maulana Hastaq Mohani, who came up with the slogan 'Inquilab zindabad' could be behind bars under this draconian law." Senior Advocate at the Supreme Court Sanjay Hegde'He Is Filled With Courage': Umar Khalid’s Mother as He Marks Two Years in JailMeanwhile, Supreme Court Advocate Prashant Bhushan took to Twitter to point out that the rejection of bail to Umar Khalid was "unjust.""There is absolutely no credible evidence against Umar reg his involvement with any conspiracy or violent activity. On the contrary videos of all his speeches show him preaching non violence even in response to violence," he said on Twitter.The court had in its judgment observed that the protests against the Citizenship Amendement Act, 2019 (CAA) and the 2020 North-East Delhi Riots seem prima facie to have been orchestrated at “conspirational meetings” between December 2019 and February 2020 — some of which were allegedly attended by Khalid. "Admittedly these protests metamorphosed into violent riots in February 2020," the court added.Meanwhile, Delhi High Court advocate Areeb Uddin took to Twitter to note that Khalid remains behind bars even after 765 days and that his bail hearing "was more like a mini trial".Taking to Twitter, Lawyer and Partner at Preamble Advisors Dushyant A noted that while gangrape and murder convicts (in the Bilkis Bano case) have been released for good behaviour, an undertrial (Umar Khalid) remains in jail.My Friend Umar Khalid: Remembering Love When Bombarded With Hate

BECOME A MEMBER

Distressing, Unjust: Legal Experts on High Court's Denial of Bail to Umar Khalid

Senior Advocate at the Supreme Court Anjana Prakash held the stringent UAPA law responsible for this.

Read Latest News and Breaking News at The Quint, browse for more from news and law

Topics: Delhi High Court Umar Khalid umar khalid arrest