<p>The Delhi High Court on Tuesday dismissed bail plea by former JNU student Umar Khalid in a case related larger conspiracy in 2020 Delhi riots, "orchestrated" during anti CAA-NRC protests, while drawing "inescapable conclusion" that his involvement in "a priori terrorists acts" are "prima facie true".</p>.<p>A bench of Justices Rajneesh Bhatnagar and Siddharth Mridul noted that different protected witnesses have stated the role of Khalid and other accused persons with regard to violence, riots, finance and weapons.</p>.<p>"Further, the weapons used, the manner of attack and the resultant deaths destruction caused indicates that it was pre-planned. Acts which threaten the unity and integrity of India and cause friction in communal harmony and creates terror in any section of the people, by disturbing the social-fabric is also a priori a terrorist act," the bench said.</p>.<p>Khalid filed petition against the trial court's order of March 24, 2022 dismissing his bail application. He was arrested on September 13, 2020 under stringent provision of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act.</p>.<p>In its judgement, the bench noted the name of the appellant finds recurring mention from the beginning of the conspiracy till the culmination of the ensuing riots.</p>.<p>"Admittedly, he was a member of the WhatsApp group of Muslim students of JNU. He participated in various meetings at Jantar Mantar, Jangpura Office, Shaheen Bagh, Seelampur, Jaffrabad and Indian Social Institute on various dates. He was a member of the DPSG group. He referred to the visit of the president of USA to India in his Amrawati speech," the bench pointed out.</p>.<p>The court also said the CDR analysis depicted that there had been a flurry of calls that happened post riots amongst the appellant and other co-accused.</p>.<p>The protests metamorphosed into violent riots in February 2020, which began by firstly choking public roads, then violently and designedly attacking policemen and random members of the public, wherein firearms, acid bottles, stones etc. were used, resulting in sad loss of 53 precious lives and the destruction of property worth several crores, the court further noted.</p>.<p>"The protest planned was "not a typical protest" normal in political culture or democracy but one far more destructive and injurious geared towards extremely grave consequences. Thus, as per the pre-meditated plan there was an intentional blocking of roads to cause inconvenience and disruption of the essential services to the life of community residing in North-East Delhi, creating thereby panic and an alarming sense of insecurity," the bench said.</p>.<p>"The attack on police personnel by women protesters in front only followed by other ordinary people and engulfing the area into a riot is the epitome of such premediated plan and as such the same would prima facie be covered by the definition of 'terrorist act'," the bench added.</p>
<p>The Delhi High Court on Tuesday dismissed bail plea by former JNU student Umar Khalid in a case related larger conspiracy in 2020 Delhi riots, "orchestrated" during anti CAA-NRC protests, while drawing "inescapable conclusion" that his involvement in "a priori terrorists acts" are "prima facie true".</p>.<p>A bench of Justices Rajneesh Bhatnagar and Siddharth Mridul noted that different protected witnesses have stated the role of Khalid and other accused persons with regard to violence, riots, finance and weapons.</p>.<p>"Further, the weapons used, the manner of attack and the resultant deaths destruction caused indicates that it was pre-planned. Acts which threaten the unity and integrity of India and cause friction in communal harmony and creates terror in any section of the people, by disturbing the social-fabric is also a priori a terrorist act," the bench said.</p>.<p>Khalid filed petition against the trial court's order of March 24, 2022 dismissing his bail application. He was arrested on September 13, 2020 under stringent provision of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act.</p>.<p>In its judgement, the bench noted the name of the appellant finds recurring mention from the beginning of the conspiracy till the culmination of the ensuing riots.</p>.<p>"Admittedly, he was a member of the WhatsApp group of Muslim students of JNU. He participated in various meetings at Jantar Mantar, Jangpura Office, Shaheen Bagh, Seelampur, Jaffrabad and Indian Social Institute on various dates. He was a member of the DPSG group. He referred to the visit of the president of USA to India in his Amrawati speech," the bench pointed out.</p>.<p>The court also said the CDR analysis depicted that there had been a flurry of calls that happened post riots amongst the appellant and other co-accused.</p>.<p>The protests metamorphosed into violent riots in February 2020, which began by firstly choking public roads, then violently and designedly attacking policemen and random members of the public, wherein firearms, acid bottles, stones etc. were used, resulting in sad loss of 53 precious lives and the destruction of property worth several crores, the court further noted.</p>.<p>"The protest planned was "not a typical protest" normal in political culture or democracy but one far more destructive and injurious geared towards extremely grave consequences. Thus, as per the pre-meditated plan there was an intentional blocking of roads to cause inconvenience and disruption of the essential services to the life of community residing in North-East Delhi, creating thereby panic and an alarming sense of insecurity," the bench said.</p>.<p>"The attack on police personnel by women protesters in front only followed by other ordinary people and engulfing the area into a riot is the epitome of such premediated plan and as such the same would prima facie be covered by the definition of 'terrorist act'," the bench added.</p>
