Delhi riots UAPA case: Opposing bail to Umar Khalid, cops say violence plan predated Kapil Mishra speech

New Delhi: Even as Special Public Prosecutor Amit Prasad continued his submissions in a Delhi court opposing the bail plea of former JNU student leader Umar Khalid in the UAPA case related to the Delhi riots, he read out from large portions of the WhatsApp chats of those arrested.

The prosecution notably argued that the "main conspirators" in the case - including Umar Khalid, Safoora Zargar and Meeran Haider among others had allegedly planned for violence as early as on February 17 of 2020 - before BJP leader Kapil Mishra ever "entered the picture".

In his arguments opposing Umar's bail petition, SPP Prasad, arguing on behalf of the Delhi Police, dismissed the complicity of the BJP leader in inciting the violence in north-east Delhi, instead claiming that the arrested accused were trying to find a name and a narrative to pin it on while purportedly planning the violence.

The prosecution continued with arguments that the anti-CAA protests in December 2019 had a lot of similarities with the riots, claiming the violence between the police and protesters in December was the "first phase" of the riots, from which the accused allegedly took lessons.

Arguing that there was planning to incite riots, the prosecution said that petrol bombs are not something available for purchase at shops.

However, even as SPP Prasad continued to read from WhatsApp chats part of the chargesheet in the riots case, Additional Sessions Judge Amitabh Rawat, who has been hearing the matter for months now, noted that the prosecution was arguing a certain manner. He noted that SPP Prasad used what was in the chats to implicate the accused but also used what was not in the conversations to imply that they were being "clever".

To this, the SPP said that the prosecution's case was that the accused in the matter were involved in a "conspiracy of silence" - which is what they were trying to argue. During the hearing on Monday, the prosecution also went on to allege that the December 2019 protests were also riots with the alleged intent to harm police personnel.

The prosecution went on to say that this intent was there during the riots in February 2020 too. It also argued that the December protests could not be taken to their intended end (allegedly) because there was not enough mobilization. SPP Prasad used messages calling for mobilisation of people for protests to argue that the accused were trying to gather "mobs" to incite violence. The hearing has now been put up for Wednesday.