‘No Recovery of Proof’: Umar Khalid Given Bail in Delhi Riots Case

Since he has not been granted bail under FIR 59, where UAPA has been invoked, he will continue to be lodged in jail.

The FIR is connected to the violence in the Khajuri Khas area of northeast Delhi and is being investigated by the Delhi Police crime branch.

(Photo: Aroop Mishra/The Quint)

After arguments that lasted one day, NE Delhi violence accused Umar Khalid has been granted bail by additional sessions judge Vinod Yadav under FIR 101 that was registered on 25 February 2020.

The judge noted that there had been no recovery of evidence from Umar Khalid.

The FIR is connected to the violence in the Khajuri Khas area of northeast Delhi and is being investigated by the Delhi Police crime branch

The charge sheet had stated that Khalid along with former AAP councillor Tahir Hussain and United Against Hate member Khalid Saifi had met on 8 January to decide to do a ‘big blast’ when Trump visited. The Quint in our exclusive investigation had found a hole in this narrative of the police as there was no knowledge whatsoever of Trump’s visit till at least the 14th of January. The story was a part of the application moved for bail by Umar Khalid’s counsels.

You can read the story here.

This was the second FIR under which Khalid was formally arrested on 1 October last year. He was already in custody then under FIR 59, where, along with other charges of rioting and criminal conspiracy, the anti-terror law Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) had also been invoked.

Since he has not been granted bail under FIR 59, he will continue to be lodged in jail.

What Does the Court Order State?

In the order accessed by The Quint, the court noted:

The applicant has been roped in the matter merely on the basis of his own disclosure statement and the disclosure statement(s) of co-accused Tahir Hussain and Khalid Saifi. It is argued that no recovery of any sort has been effected from the applicant in the matter.

Disclosure statements taken by the police under Section 161 of CrPC, also called confessions, have no evidentiary value in the trial until they lead to recovery of evidence. Here the judge also notes that there was no recovery of any sort from Khalid.

Regarding the 8 January meeting, on which The Quint had reported on, the order noted that there was no material on record that established in anyway that a meeting took place between Tahir Hussain, Umar Khalid and Khalid Saifi. It is only established that they were in the same area and no criminal conspiracy has been proved.

The bail conditions include:

• Khalid is granted bail in the matter on furnishing a Personal Bond for the sum of Rs 20,000/-
• He shall not tamper with the evidence or influence any witness in any manner.
• He shall maintain peace in the locality.
• He shall appear before the court on each and every date of hearing to attend the proceedings in accordance with the terms of Bail Bond.
• He 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.
• He shall also install “Aarogya Setu App” on his mobile phone.

What Does the Charge Sheet Say About Umar Khalid?

The charge sheet primarily focuses on the alleged involvement of former AAP councillor Tahir Hussain. However, it makes repeated mentions of him along with Khalid.

Most significantly, this charge sheet speaks of the 8 January meeting where the trio of Hussain, Khalid Saifi and Khalid allegedly met to plan these riots at Shaheen Bagh.

The charge sheet reads: “He (Tahir Hussain) was found connected to Khalid Saifi and Khalid who are part of a larger group of persons who were organising riots and protests in Delhi.”

This is a hole in the narrative of the Delhi Police on the alleged conspiracy, The Quint had revealed in a story.

There is also a flow chart which allegedly shows ‘Tahir Hussain speaking and connecting with a host of other co-conspirators’. There are 21 names in this flow chart with Khalid’s name featuring prominently on it.

What Are the Sections Under FIR 101

The various sections of the FIR are: Section 109 (punishment of abetment if the act abetted is committed in consequence and where no express provision is made for its punishment), 114 (abettor present when offence is committed), 147 (rioting), 148 (rioting, armed with deadly weapon), 149 (unlawful assembly), 186 (obstructing public servant in discharge of public functions), 353 (assault or criminal force to deter public servant from discharge of his duty), 395 (punishment for dacoity), 427 (mischief causing damage to the amount of fifty rupees), 435 (mischief by fire or explosive substance with intent to cause damage to amount of one hundred or ten rupees), 436 (mischief by fire or explosive substance with intent to destroy house, etc.), 452 (house-trespass after preparation for hurt, assault or wrongful restraint), 454 (lurking house-trespass or house-breaking in order to commit offence punishable with imprisonment), 153A (promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence etc), 505 (statements conducing to public mischief ), 120B (criminal conspiracy), 34 (common intention) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3 and 4 Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act as well as 25/27 Arms Act.