New Delhi: The Delhi High Court on Friday was told that the use of the word revolutionary is not unconstitutional while it was hearing the bail plea of Umar Khalid accused in the Delhi riots case. Umar Khalid has challenged the trial court order of March 24 denying him bail in the larger conspiracy of North East Delhi riots case.
When the plea came up before the Division Bench comprising of Justice Siddharth Mridul and Justice Rajnish Bhatnagar for hearing, the Bench said it would heard it on daily basis from May 23. This would help complete the hearing before the summer vacations begin.
Lawyer Trideep Pais appearing for Omar Khalid made his submissions on the use of the word revolution and revolutionary. "The word revolution and revolutionary's use is not unconstitutional. There was no call for violence in the speech given by Umar Khalid in Amaravati. During Umar Khalid's speech, the whole crowd sat peacefully and even after that the crowd did not get agitated," he said
During the hearing on Friday, the bench objected to some portion of speech delivered at Amaravati mentioning Prime Minister Modi. Justice Bhatnagar asked can such words be used for Prime Minister? Senior Advocate responded by saying that those words were used as a metaphor to show that the reality and practical issues of the country which were being hidden in reality. However Justice Bhatnagar said, " Some other words could have been used for the Prime Minister."
Also read: 2020 Delhi riots: Court orders framing of rioting, other charges against Tahir Hussain
During the hearing, Justice Rajnish Bhatnagar asked Trideep Pais on Khalid's speech on the Prime Minister's speech on 'Hindustan mein sab changa nahi, Hindustan mein sab naga si'. Replying to this comment Pais said that this is a metaphor which means that the truth is something else that is being hidden.
Justice Bhatnagar also asked the Senior Advocate Trideep Pais if Mahatama Gandhi had ever used such words for a queen. "Your client (Umar Khalid) had said again and again that we will follow Mahatama Gandhi," he said. The bench also asked what Umar Khalid mean when he used the words 'Inquilab' and 'Krantikari' in the Amaravati Speech. Pais apprised the court about the dictionary meaning of these words.
Justice Mridul said, " You used the expression inqilab and Krantikari. All of us know what it means. You used the expression inqilab zindabad. That's what we asked you." Senior Advocate Pais responded to court by referring to a historian that the word inqilab means revolution whereas the word inqilab zindabad means long live the revolution.
At the outset of hearing Pais produced a transcription of the speech delivered at Amravati and some other documents to explain the meaning of the words. He also referred to the portion of the chargesheet which pointed out the allegations of the prosecution that Khalid was involved in terror activities.
During the hearing on April 27, Justice Rajnish Bhatnagar asked Umar Khalid's lawyer Tridip Payas whether the use of the word 'jumla' against the Prime Minister of the country was appropriate. Then Pais had said that it is not illegal to criticize the government or the policies of the government. Pais further said, "Criticizing the government is not a crime. 583 days in jail with UAPA charges was not imagined for a person speaking out against the government. We cannot be so intolerant."
During the earlier hearing, Justice Mridul had said that the speech Umar Khalid delivered at Amravati was 'obnoxious' and that the criticism of the government is allowed, but a 'Lakshman Rekha' should not be crossed. Special Public Prosecutor (SPP) Amit Prasad informed the court that he would require four to five hours to complete his arguments.
