Where is evidence that links activist to R-Day violence: Delhi court

New Delhi: Asking the Delhi Police whether their allegations against arrested 22-year-old climate activist Disha Ravi is based solely on "conjectures and surmises", a Delhi court on Saturday questioned the link between her and the violence that broke out on Republic Day during the farmers' protest.

The observations were made by Additional Sessions Judge Dharmender Rana while hearing a bail plea moved by Ravi, after she was remanded to a 3-day judicial custody on Friday as police had argued that the same is required because she was being "evasive" and needed to be confronted with co-accused Shantanu Muluk and Nikita Jacob.

The court has reserved the orders on her bail plea for Tuesday. During the 3-hour long hearing, with reference to her being in touch with "Khalistani" elements, the court asked police that if the accused is attached with a movement and meets certain people with certain intentions, "how do you impute the credentials on me?"

"If I approach a dacoit for temple donation, how do you say that I'm privy to dacoity? What is the material against her?" ASJ Rana asked Additional Solicitor General SV Raju, appearing on behalf of the police.

The court further asked police to present direct evidence connecting Ravi and the January 26 violence. "How is the toolkit connected to the violence?... What is the evidence?" the court asked.

However, ASG Raju stated that the investigation is still in progress and more data needs to be recovered to gather further information.

At one point ASJ Rana asked the police: "Either I've not framed my query correctly or you don't want to answer it. What is the connection between the conspiracy and the offence?"

While opposing Ravi's bail plea, ASG Raju along with Public Prosecutor Irfan Ahmed, claimed that Ravi started a Whatsapp group called International Farmers Strike which was allegedly in touch with organisations like Poetic Justice Foundation (PJF) and Sikhs for Justice and that the "secessionist organisations" needed an Indian face and allegedly wanted to take advantage of the farmers protest to carry out its propaganda.

ASG Raju submitted that the toolkit was a "facade" that was used to cause violence in the capital and that the google doc also wanted to malign the country by highlighting the Kashmir genocide and defame the army.

ASG Raju further alleged that a Zoom meeting took place on January 11 and on several other instances after it, between the co-accused persons and Ravi where contact was made with such organisations to prepare a toolkit where hyperlinks inside it allegedly asked people to "come to Delhi and participate in the farmers' rally".

"On January 20, the toolkit was created...programme created to execute it is incriminating...the accused consented to the fact that the toolkit was to be shared with the PJF...these accused persons wanted to make this agitation international," ASG Raju argued.

The ASG further submitted that Ravi was confronted with the evidence following which she was allegedly forced to admit that she had deleted the WhatsApp group. "When we showed it to her, her lie was caught and then she accepted...constantly she is not cooperating with the investigation...she deleted her own chat to destroy the evidence...this shows her guilty mind and sinister intent," ASG Raju submitted.

Appearing for Ravi, Advocate Siddharth Agarwal argued that his client is a 22-year-old girl living in Bengaluru and her history has nothing to do with Khalistan. "She's not a rebel without a cause...she is with the cause of the environment, agriculture…", he submitted.

Agarwal, on behalf of Ravi, also told the court that If highlighting protest globally is sedition, I (Ravi) am better in jail. I (defence counsel) also support farmers. But if that's an offence, let's all go to jail.

He further argued that there is no connection whatsoever "as fleeting as it maybe" of Ravi with the two organisations. He also questioned as to why aren't the groups being banned by the state and hence "how can it be a forewarning to any person associated with them?"

"The toolkit has no disaffection...we are now reducing the bar of accepting the fact that someone has a different point of view…there is no call for violence...", Agarwal further argued.