'Indeed A Hate Speech': Delhi Court Orders Framing Charges Against Sharjeel Imam In 2019 Jamia Violence

Additional sessions judge Vishal Singh observed that Imam's speech of December 13 near Jamia University was a "venomous", "pitted one religion against another" and was "indeed a hate speech".

File photo of activist Sharjeel Imam.

Source : PTI

New Delhi: A Delhi court has said activist Sharjeel Imam was not only an instigator but also one of the "kingpins of a larger conspiracy to incite violence" and ordered framing of charges against in the 2019 Jamia violence case.

Additional sessions judge Vishal Singh observed that Imam's speech of December 13 near Jamia University was a "venomous", "pitted one religion against another" and was "indeed a hate speech".

The court was hearing the case against Iman and others against whom the New Friends Colony Police had registered an FIR under various provisions of the IPC, Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act (PDPP) and Arms Act. Delhi Police's Crime Branch is investigating the matter.

In an order dated March 7, the court said, "Evidently, the assembling of a huge mob and the mass scale rioting committed by it was not a random or spontaneous happening and could not have been committed except in pursuance of a larger conspiracy entered into between the self proclaimed leaders and initiaters of the mob activity, whereas, other members of the mob/unlawful assembly kept joining in."

It noted the prosecution’s argument that Imam gave a speech on December 13, 2019, provoking his audience by saying that despite having significant Muslim population in different states of northern India, why were they allowing the cities to function normally and why were they not causing chakka jam (stoppage of public movement)? The court said Imam being a senior PhD (doctor of philosophy) student "craftily clothed his speech" in which he avoided the mention of communities other than the Muslim community but the intended victims of the chakka jaam were members of other communities.

"Why, otherwise, accused Sharjeel Imam incited only the members of the Muslim religion to disrupt the normal functioning of the society?" the court asked.

It went on, "His speech was calculated to evoke anger and hatred, the natural consequence of which was commission of widespread violence by members of unlawful assembly on public roads. His speech was venomous and pitted one religion against another. It was, indeed, a hate speech." The court said that there could be nothing peaceful about a chakka jaam.

"In a populous city like Delhi, at any given time scores of critically ill medical patients requiring urgent treatment are in a rush to reach hospitals. Chakka jaam can potentially lead to deterioration of their condition or even death if they do not receive medical care in time, which would be nothing short of culpable homicide," the court added.

Chakka jaam, the order said, essentially resulted in a violation of fundamental right to life and health of public and even if the mob did not indulge in violence and arson while enforcing the jaam, it would still be a violent act by one section of society against the other.

"Accused Sharjeel Imam was not only an instigator, he was also one of the kingpins of a larger conspiracy to incite violence," it said.

Iman has been ordered to be charged under IPC provisions, including abetment, criminal conspiracy, promoting enmity between groups, rioting, unlawful assembly, attempt to commit culpable homicide, obstructing public servant, causing mischief by fire or explosive substance and under PDPP provisions.

On the role of three other accused persons, the court said, "Accused Ashu Khan, Chandan Kumar and Aasif Iqbal Tanha committed abetment by prior conspiracy as well as by instigating violent mob activity at the spot, for which penal provision of Section 109 (abetment) of the IPC is justifiably invoked against them." Section 109 deals with abetment of an offence and attracting the same punishment given to the offender.

The court ordered framing charges under various IPC and PDPP Act provisions against Anal Hussain, Anwar, Yunus and Jumman, saying it was established by a police witness and their mobile phone records that they were part of the riotous mob.

The case stems from 2019-2020 protests at Jamia Millia Islamia and Shaheen Bagh following passage of Citizenship Amendment Act in Parliament on December 11, 2019.

(This report has been published as part of the auto-generated syndicate wire feed. Apart from the headline, no editing has been done in the copy by ABP Live.)