Last Updated:
Advocate Talib Mustafa contended that the narrative of Imam being a ‘disciple’ of Khalid was a fabrication intended to bolster a weak conspiracy case linked to the 2020 Delhi riots
Mustafa argued that during Imam’s five-year tenure at Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU), he had never once interacted with Khalid (L). File image/PTI
The counsel for the jailed activist Sharjeel Imam told a Delhi court on Thursday that the prosecution’s allegation regarding Umar Khalid mentoring his client was “absurd” and entirely without merit. Appearing before Additional Sessions Judge Sameer Bajpai at the Karkardooma Courts, Advocate Talib Mustafa contended that the narrative of Imam being a “disciple” of Khalid was a fabrication intended to bolster a weak conspiracy case. The hearing focused on the framing of charges in the 2020 Delhi riots larger conspiracy case, registered under the stringent Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA).
Mustafa argued that during Imam’s five-year tenure at Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU), he had never once interacted with Khalid. He emphasised that there was no agreement or coordination between the two individuals to incite violence or orchestrate the communal riots that rocked Northeast Delhi in February 2020. The counsel noted that for a conspiracy to be established, the prosecution must demonstrate a clear agreement between parties, a burden he claimed the Delhi Police had failed to meet. He further pointed out that there was only a single recorded instance of the two appearing together in a meeting, yet even witness statements from that gathering made no mention of any discussion regarding violence.
The defence maintained that Imam’s participation in the anti-CAA protests was rooted in nonviolent resistance. Mustafa asserted that a thorough examination of his client’s speeches, pamphlets, and private chats would reveal a consistent advocacy for peaceful agitation rather than the communal discord alleged by the authorities. The counsel’s submissions come at a critical juncture, just days after the Supreme Court on January 5 denied bail to both Imam and Khalid. In that ruling, the apex court had distinguished their roles as being “architectural” and “central” to the alleged conspiracy, placing them on a “qualitatively different footing” compared to other accused.
While five other co-accused, including Gulfisha Fatima and Meeran Haider, were granted bail by the Supreme Court earlier this week, Imam and Khalid remain in custody at Tihar Jail. The High Court had previously characterised their alleged roles as grave, involving inflammatory speeches intended to instigate mass mobilisation. However, Imam’s legal team continues to challenge the “mastermind” label, arguing that the investigation has relied on tenuous links rather than substantial evidence of a shared criminal intent. As the court continues to hear arguments on the framing of charges, the legal battle remains a focal point for the interpretation of dissent and national security laws in India.
January 08, 2026, 10:50 PM IST
Read More
Source link
[ad_3]
