It must be noted that the case stems from 2019-2020 protests at Jamia Millia Islamia and Shaheen Bagh following the passage of the Citizenship Amendment Act in Parliament on December 11, 2019.
The Delhi court on Monday framed charges against Sharjeel Imam in 2019 Jamia Millia Violence case saying that he was not only an instigator but also one of the “kingpins of a larger conspiracy to incite violence.” Vishal Singh, the Additional Sessions judge, observed that Sharjeels’ speech near Jamia University on December 13 was “venomous”, “pitted one religion against another”, and was “indeed a hate speech”
The court has charged Sharjeel under IPC provisions, including abetment, criminal conspiracy, rioting, unlawful assembly, promoting enmity between groups, attempt to commit culpable homicide, obstructing public servant, and causing mischief by fire or explosive substance and under PDPP provisions..
The court was hearing the case against Iman and others against whom the New Friends Colony Police had registered an FIR under various provisions of the IPC, Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act (PDPP) and Arms Act. Delhi Police’s Crime Branch is investigating the matter.
In an order dated March 7, the court said, “Evidently, the assembling of a huge mob and the mass scale rioting committed by it was not a random or spontaneous happening and could not have been committed except in pursuance of a larger conspiracy entered into between the self proclaimed leaders and initiaters of the mob activity, whereas, other members of the mob/unlawful assembly kept joining in.”
‘Craftily clothed his speech’: Court
The court noted the prosecution’s argument that Imam gave a speech on December 13, 2019, provoking his audience by saying that despite having significant Muslim population in different states of northern India, why were they allowing the cities to function normally and why were they not causing chakka jam (stoppage of public movement)?
The court stated that him being a senior PhD student “craftily clothed his speech” in which he avoided the mention of communities other than the Muslim community but the intended victims of the chakka jam were members of other communities. “Why, otherwise, accused Sharjeel Imam incited only the members of the Muslim religion to disrupt the normal functioning of the society?” the court asked.
The court went on and said, “His speech was calculated to evoke anger and hatred, the natural consequence of which was commission of widespread violence by members of unlawful assembly on public roads. His speech was venomous and pitted one religion against another. It was, indeed, a hate speech.”
Court says jam essentially is violation of fundamental right to life, health
The court added that there could be nothing peaceful about a chakka jam. “In a populous city like Delhi, at any given time, scores of critically ill medical patients requiring urgent treatment are in a rush to reach hospitals. Chakka jaam can potentially lead to deterioration of their condition or even death if they do not receive medical care in time, which would be nothing short of culpable homicide,” the court added.
The order further stated that Chakka jam essentially resulted in a violation of fundamental right to life and health of public. Furthermore, it said that even if the mob did not indulge in violence and arson during the jam, it would still be a violent act by one section of society against the other.
(With PTI Inputs)