Delhi HC's remarks against Sharjeel Imam would not affect his case: SC

The court observed that the remarks while deciding on the bail plea of another co-accused will anyway not affect Imam's case, further clarifying that the merits of the case won't be affected by observations made during the Delhi HC hearing.

New Delhi:The Supreme Court on Friday clarified that the observations made in the case against JNU student Sharjeel Imam in the Delhi High Court verdict, which rejected the bail plea of co-accused Umar Khalid in a case of alleged conspiracy behind the February 2020 riots in northeast Delhi, will not prejudice his case pending before the court.

The case concerning the remarks made against Imaam in the October 18 judgment of the high court came up today before the bench comprising Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Justice Abhay S Oka. The court observed that the remarks while deciding on the bail plea of another co-accused will anyway not affect Imam's case, further clarifying that the merits of the case won't be affected by observations made during the Delhi HC hearing.

The Delhi High Court had earlier observed that Sharjeel Imam was "at the head of the conspiracy" and Umar Khalid was in constant touch with him, thereby rejecting Khalid's bail plea. Objecting to these observations, Imam had moved to the top court seeking expunging of the remarks. He contended that the remarks were passed without even giving him an opportunity to speak and it was against the principle of natural justice. He said that such remarks can affect his case and the bail application.

Hearing the matter, the bench said one of the paragraphs in the verdict clarified "nothing stated hereinabove shall tantamount to an expression of any opinion on the merits of the case"."This happens when people argue bail applications like it is an appeal on merits," Justice Kaul observed, adding that bail applications should not be argued for over 10 minutes.

"....having carefully gone through the charge-sheet and taking into consideration the fact that the appellant (Khalid) was in constant touch with other co-accused persons, including Sharjeel Imam, who arguably is at the head of the conspiracy; at this stage, it is difficult to form an opinion that there are no reasonable grounds for believing that the accusation against the petitioner is prima facie not proved," the high court had said in its verdict.

"We clarify that any observation made regarding the role of the petitioner will not prejudice the petitioner in any manner," ordered the court.

After its order, Justice Kaul also observed he finds it a complete wastage of time when a hearing on bail applications goes on and on.

Khalid, Sharjeel Imam and several others have been booked under the anti-terror law the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) and provisions of the Indian Penal Code for allegedly being the "masterminds" of the February 2020 riots, which left 53 people dead and over 700 injured. The violence erupted during the protests against the Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA) and the National Register of Citizens (NRC).