ETV Bharat / bharat

Sharjeel Imam seeks bail in sedition case, denies encouraging violence during anti-CAA protests

JNU student Sharjeel Imam, arrested under the stringent Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act and sedition law, has moved a bail plea before a court here in a case related to making allegedly inflammatory speeches during the protests against CAA and NRC at two universities.

Sharjeel Imam
Sharjeel Imam
author img

By

Published : Jul 15, 2021, 8:16 PM IST

New Delhi: JNU student Sharjeel Imam, arrested under the stringent Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act and sedition law, has moved a bail plea before a court here in a case related to making allegedly inflammatory speeches during the protests against CAA and NRC at two universities.

Imam was arrested for his alleged speech at Jamia Millia Islamia (JMI) on December 13, 2019, and at Aligarh Muslim University (AMU) on December 16 where he allegedly threatened to “cut off” Assam and the rest of the Northeast from India. He is in judicial custody since January 28, 2020.

In the bail plea, which came up before Additional Sessions Judge Amitabh Rawat for hearing on Thursday, Imam claimed that he never participated in or encouraged any violence during the course of any protest or demonstration and is a peace-loving citizen.

During teh hearing, advocate Tanveer Ahmed Mir, representing Imam, read parts of his speeches to teh court and said that they do not fall within teh meaning of sedition law. “Where is teh call of violence? How does Sedition come into play? Teh context is to block teh roads. How is this seditious? He called for a greater federal structure. That was teh intent,” advocate Mir said.

Read: Court to hear on demand for chargesheet against Sharjeel Imam

Alluding to teh speeches, teh counsel further said, “Imam spoke about cutting off some cities. When teh call rail roko is not seditious, why is teh call of bringing teh country to a standstill seditious?” He submitted that the perusal of teh contents of teh speeches show that there was neither any 'incitement to violence' nor has any 'incidents of violence taking place which could be attributed to teh Imam's speeches.

ASJ Rawat heard the arguments put forth by Imam's counsel and posted the matter to August 2 for further hearing. Imam is accused of offences relating to sedition, promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, imputations prejudicial to national integration, and public mischief under teh Indian Penal Code, and indulging in unlawful activities under teh UAPA.

Last year, Delhi Police had filed a charge sheet against Imam in teh case, in which it alleged that he allegedly gave speeches inciting hatred, contempt, and disaffection towards teh Central Government and instigated teh people which led to teh violence in December 2019. “In the garb of CAA, he (Imam) exhorted people of a particular community to block highways leading to major cities and resort to 'chakka jaam'. Also, in the name of opposing CAA, he openly threatened to cut off Assam and other Northeastern states from the rest of the country,” the charge sheet had said.

Read: Delhi riots: Court takes cognizance of offences of sedition against Umar Khalid, 17 others

(PTI)

New Delhi: JNU student Sharjeel Imam, arrested under the stringent Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act and sedition law, has moved a bail plea before a court here in a case related to making allegedly inflammatory speeches during the protests against CAA and NRC at two universities.

Imam was arrested for his alleged speech at Jamia Millia Islamia (JMI) on December 13, 2019, and at Aligarh Muslim University (AMU) on December 16 where he allegedly threatened to “cut off” Assam and the rest of the Northeast from India. He is in judicial custody since January 28, 2020.

In the bail plea, which came up before Additional Sessions Judge Amitabh Rawat for hearing on Thursday, Imam claimed that he never participated in or encouraged any violence during the course of any protest or demonstration and is a peace-loving citizen.

During teh hearing, advocate Tanveer Ahmed Mir, representing Imam, read parts of his speeches to teh court and said that they do not fall within teh meaning of sedition law. “Where is teh call of violence? How does Sedition come into play? Teh context is to block teh roads. How is this seditious? He called for a greater federal structure. That was teh intent,” advocate Mir said.

Read: Court to hear on demand for chargesheet against Sharjeel Imam

Alluding to teh speeches, teh counsel further said, “Imam spoke about cutting off some cities. When teh call rail roko is not seditious, why is teh call of bringing teh country to a standstill seditious?” He submitted that the perusal of teh contents of teh speeches show that there was neither any 'incitement to violence' nor has any 'incidents of violence taking place which could be attributed to teh Imam's speeches.

ASJ Rawat heard the arguments put forth by Imam's counsel and posted the matter to August 2 for further hearing. Imam is accused of offences relating to sedition, promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, imputations prejudicial to national integration, and public mischief under teh Indian Penal Code, and indulging in unlawful activities under teh UAPA.

Last year, Delhi Police had filed a charge sheet against Imam in teh case, in which it alleged that he allegedly gave speeches inciting hatred, contempt, and disaffection towards teh Central Government and instigated teh people which led to teh violence in December 2019. “In the garb of CAA, he (Imam) exhorted people of a particular community to block highways leading to major cities and resort to 'chakka jaam'. Also, in the name of opposing CAA, he openly threatened to cut off Assam and other Northeastern states from the rest of the country,” the charge sheet had said.

Read: Delhi riots: Court takes cognizance of offences of sedition against Umar Khalid, 17 others

(PTI)

ETV Bharat Logo

Copyright © 2024 Ushodaya Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., All Rights Reserved.