The Delhi High Court on Wednesday asked sharp questions to the public prosecutor on the bail plea of JNU student Sharjeel Imam in cases related to the Delhi riots. The court said that why the Imam should not get bail. The question of the court on the charge of sedition was that before making this allegation it is necessary to see whether violence was called for or not.
A bench of Justice Siddharth Mridul and Justice Anoop Kumar Mendiratta expressed surprise at the attitude of the lower court and said that they have not done anything. All these offenses are less than 7 years old. Why shouldn’t Sharjeel be released? Is he in danger of running away and can he tamper with the evidence? The court also questioned about the witnesses in the case. The date of issue of notice has been fixed on March 24.
Delhi Police’s lawyer told that Sharjeel is accused of section 124A. Under this there is a provision for life imprisonment. Justice Mridul said that sedition requires a special call for violence. He told the lawyer that you really have to convince the court why bail should not be granted in this case. The court said that the police would reply on this matter in the next hearing.
Sharjeel Imam has filed an appeal in the High Court challenging the orders of the lower court. Earlier, the trial court had rejected his bail plea. Charges have been framed against him under sedition and other sections of the IPC.
Sharjeel’s lawyer Tanveer Ahmed Mir told the High Court that in the FIR, three lines are being taken out of the speech saying that his client was inciting violence. Mir said that if we see the speech in full, then the allegation of the police seems to be baseless. Mir said that at many places he is talking about not resorting to violence. He said that Sharjeel is being kept in jail by giving absurd arguments.