'How is creating a group chat for Muslim students, talking of chakka jam terrorism?'

New Delhi: Former JNU student leader Umar Khalid, accused in the Delhi riots conspiracy case, on Tuesday told a court here that the police have written fanciful stories in the UAPA chargesheet against him and contended whether organizing chakka jaam (road blockade) could invite terror charges.

Umar, along with several other student activists and civil society members, has been incarcerated for over a year now in the UAPA case related to the purported "main conspiracy" behind the north-east Delhi riots last year.

Arguing his bail plea in the riots conspiracy case before Additional Sessions Judge Amitabh Rawat, his lawyer referred to the supplementary chargesheet filed in the case and said that the police wished to paint every accused with the same brush while adding 'tadka' (flavour) to it.

On Tuesday, senior advocate Trideep Pais, appearing for Umar, told the court, "I'll show your honour how UAPA is not made out or allegations are improbable."

He referred to three allegations made against the accused in the chargesheet, emphasising that they were fertile imagination of the police and had no consistency. First, he chose to address the allegation that Umar allegedly directed Sharjeel Imam to create a WhatsApp group of Muslim students.

Denying it, Pais asked, "Constituting a WhatsApp group of Muslim students, is it a terror? There is no witness to say that it was formed on the instance of Umar (Khalid)," adding Umar had never sent a single message on the group and no communication was found between Sharjeel and Umar. Just being in a group is not a crime, the counsel emphasised in a one-hour-long hearing.

He then moved on to the allegation that Umar introduced Imam to Yogender Yadav at an event in Jantar Mantar on December 7, 2019. "Police said that Imam was introduced to Yogender Yadav by Umar Khalid, his senior and mentor. 'Senior', 'mentor' - this 'tadka' (flavour) has been put by them. It is such a dangerous thing," the counsel said.

Pais also said that the speech purportedly given by Umar Khalid was produced by the police and there is no evidence that it incited anybody.

"The officer wants to tell the story but he forgets that he is not a storyteller, he is dealing with the law. Every assertion in the charge sheet must have a basis but this does not have any basis," the lawyer added.

Umar's lawyer then got to the third allegation of Umar having discussed a "chakka jam" in a meeting on December 8, 2019. "Is chakka jam an offence, does it invite UAPA? Is a meeting to say that our protest will involve chakka jam automatically a criminal conspiracy? Where does it say it's a crime? This meeting has found itself on every news item, branded about like some great conspiracy," he said.

The lawyer read out the statement of three prosecution witnesses and claimed that none of them described it as a secret meeting. The trio did not sign it, and it was recorded after a delay, Pais added.

If I am the mastermind, then why are these witnesses not saying what suits you? Mere presence in a meeting or being a part of a WhatsApp group is not a crime. Attending a meeting is not a crime by any stretch of the imagination, Pais said. The court will now hear the bail plea on November 2.