New Delhi, Jan 8 (NationPress) Activist Sharjeel Imam concluded his arguments before a Delhi court regarding the framing of charges in the purported ‘larger conspiracy’ case associated with the 2020 Northeast Delhi riots. He claimed he never endorsed violence nor coordinated with co-accused Umar Khalid.

While addressing Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) Sameer Bajpai at Karkardooma Courts, Imam’s attorney Talib Mustafa argued that the prosecution failed to demonstrate any agreement or coordination between Imam and Khalid, which is essential to substantiate a charge of criminal conspiracy.

“Throughout my five years at JNU, I never interacted with Umar Khalid. I am unaware of the coordination they mention. To prove a conspiracy, an agreement must be shown, but they have not provided any evidence of such,” Imam's lawyer stated in court.

He further asserted that the claim that Khalid directed Imam was also untrue.

“There is only a single meeting where Umar and I appear together. However, even the witness testimony from that meeting indicates there was no dialogue about violence,” Mustafa explained.

The attorney further insisted that during the protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) in 2019-20, Imam consistently advocated for non-violence and never incited violent protests.

“Their assertion is that I desired violence, riots, and bloodshed. However, none of my meetings discussed violence; I have always advocated for non-violence,” Mustafa declared.

This development follows the Supreme Court's recent dismissal of bail applications from Imam and Khalid, affirming that the prosecution's evidence cumulatively indicated reasonable grounds for believing that the allegations against them were prima facie valid under Section 43D(5) of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA).

The Supreme Court remarked that “the appropriate judicial response should prioritize expediency rather than granting bail in disregard of the statutory mandate.”

“The solution for stagnation lies in careful judicial oversight and mandates for quick progress, not in granting bail where restrictions apply,” it added.

The Supreme Court urged the trial court to prioritize this matter and ensure proceedings are conducted with due urgency.

However, bail was granted to five other defendants in the case — Gulfisha Fatima, Meeran Haider, Shifa Ur Rehman, Mohd Saleem Khan, and Shadab Ahmed.

The Delhi Police has accused Imam, Khalid, and others of engaging in terrorism and conspiring to provoke violence during the city riots of 2020.

Following the conclusion of Imam's counsel's arguments at Karkardooma Courts, discussions from the other defendants are expected to commence next week.