The Delhi High Court has rejected the bail plea of Athar Khan, an accused in the 2020 North-East Delhi riots conspiracy case. The court cited evidence of his involvement in the violence and concerns regarding the potential to influence witnesses. This decision maintains the legal status of the case under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act.
The Delhi High Court on Tuesday dismissed the bail application filed by Athar Khan regarding his involvement in the 2020 North-East Delhi riots conspiracy. A division bench consisting of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Madhu Jain concluded that the evidence presented suggested his prima facie role in the events that led to multiple fatalities. The court noted that releasing the accused at this stage could pose a flight risk and potentially interfere with the judicial process by impacting witnesses.
Prosecution Arguments and Legal Context
During the proceedings, counsel for Athar Khan argued that his communications via WhatsApp were intended to organize non-violent protests rather than incite communal unrest. The defense maintained that Khan served only as a local coordinator without the power to influence broader decision-making. Conversely, Additional Solicitor General S.V. Raju, appearing for the Delhi Police, strongly contested these claims. The prosecution utilized digital evidence, including WhatsApp messages, to argue that Khan’s actions were more central to the conspiracy than described by his counsel. The state emphasized that his role was comparable to other key figures previously charged in the same case, leading the court to uphold the application of the stringent Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA).
Case Background and Current Status
The 2020 Delhi riots followed widespread protests concerning the Citizenship Amendment Act and resulted in significant loss of life and public property. In the aftermath, several individuals were arrested and charged with orchestrating a larger conspiracy behind the violence. Athar Khan had previously sought bail in a sessions court, which was denied on January 29. Following that rejection, he moved his appeal to the High Court, which has now affirmed the lower court's stance. This development marks a continuation of the ongoing trial under the UAPA, with the judiciary maintaining a cautious approach regarding bail for those accused of involvement in severe communal violence. The next steps will involve the continuation of the trial process as the prosecution proceeds with the evidence gathered.