Delhi Court Gives Umar Khalid Bail in Khajuri Khas Riots Case, Asks to Install Aarogya Setu

Khalid is unlikely to walk free right away, as FIR 59, in connection with which he has been charged under the UAPA, is still pending.

New Delhi: A Delhi court has granted bail to former JNU scholar Umar Khalid in a northeast Delhi riots case connected with an FIR lodged over the violence at the Khajuri Khas area.

LiveLaw has tweeted Judge Vinod Yadav as having noted that, “The applicant cannot be made to incarcerate in jail for infinity merely on account of the fact that other persons who were part of the riotous mob have to be identified and arrested in the matter.”

The judge had made a similar observation while granting bail to another riots accused recently.

The judge said that Khalid will be given bail on payment of Rs 20,000 bond and surety of like amount. As a further bail condition, he asked Khalid to install the Aarogya Setu app.

“…[H]e shall furnish his mobile number to SHO, PS Khajuri Khas upon his release from the jail and will ensure the same to be in working condition and further he shall also get installed “Aarogya Setu App” in his mobile phone,” judge Yadav said.

While Khalid has got bail in FIR 101, FIR 59 – under which he has been charged under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act – is still pending. It is therefore unlikely that he will walk free right away.

The manner of the Delhi Police’s movement in interrogating and arresting Khalid had come in for severe criticism. In addition, as his trial progressed, details of his chargesheet were reportedly made available to select media houses, which reported on it with the zeal of a trial itself.

“Presumption of innocence” should not be destroyed at the very threshold of the justice process through media trial, a Delhi court said in January while hearing a plea moved by Khalid on the above.

The court on April 15, too, noted that Khalid was only arrested in connection with this present FIR after he had already been in custody for almost a month. In addition to the question of parity with activist Khalid Saifi, who also received bail but is jailed in connection with his UAPA charges, the court noted:

“It is a matter of record that co-accused Khalid Saifi has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide detailed order dated 04.11.2020 and the learned Special PP has been unable to establish that the role assigned to applicant is not similar to the role attributed to co-accused Khalid Saifi,” the court said.

The court also observed that Police’s efforts to tie Khalid’s culpability in the riots to the anti-Citizenship Amendment Acts protests at Shaheen Bagh, did not impress it.

“The argument of learned Special PP that applicant had been in regular contact/touch with co-accused Tahir Hussain and
Khalid Saifi over mobile phone and the same is evident from the fact their CDR location on 08.01.2020 has been found to be at Shaheen Bagh is hardly of any consequences, as prima facie that does not in any way go on to establish the criminal conspiracy alleged against the applicant in the matter.”

The court came down severely on the process of investigation followed by Delhi Police, noting that the selective mention of criminal conspiracy when convenient does not “appeal to the senses.”

“Even the statement of PW Rahul Kasana recorded U/s 161 Cr.P.C in the matter merely talks of some meeting between the applicant, co-accused Tahir Hussain and Khalid Saifi on 08.01.2020, however, the same does not disclose about the subject matter of such meeting.”

“Be that as it may, it is relevant to note here that said PW Rahul Kasana is also a witness in case FIR No.59/2020, in which case also the “criminal conspiracy” angle is being investigated by Special Cell of Delhi Police. In the said case the statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C of PW Rahul Kasana was recorded on 21.05.2020, on which date he did not utter a single word against the applicant qua “criminal conspiracy” and now all of a sudden, he vide his statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C in the matter on 27.09.2020 blew the trumpet of “criminal conspiracy” against the applicant. This prima facie does not appeal to the senses.”