On 9th September 2022, the Supreme Court granted bail to so-called journalist Siddique Kappan who is accused of planning to incite riots over the Hathras case. The court has asked him to deposit his passport and mark regular attendance at the police station as he is released on bail after 2 years.
Besides, the court has imposed strict conditions on the accused Siddique Kappan. The court ordered that he will live in Delhi for the first 6 weeks after his release. After this, he is allowed to move to Kerala, but even in Kerala, he is ordered to regularly mark his attendance at the local police station.
#BREAKING Supreme Court grants bail to Kerala journalist Siddique Kappan. Asks him to be in Delhi for next 6 weeks and allows him to go back to Kerala after that on conditions like he shall mark his presence with local police station every week and other conditions.
— Live Law (@LiveLawIndia) September 9, 2022
A bench led by CJI UU Lalit heard the case. Senior Advocate Mahesh Jethmalani appeared for the Uttar Pradesh state government while Kapil Sibal represented Siddique Kappan in this case. Stating the charges against the accused, Mahesh Jethmalani said, “Kappan was in a meeting of PFI in Sep 2020. It was said in the meeting that funding had stopped. It was decided in the meeting that they will go to sensitive areas and incite riots. On Oct 5, they decided to go to Hathras to incite riots. He was funded with Rs 45,000 to create riots.”
Mahesh Jethmalani added, “He claimed to be accredited to a newspaper Tejus. We have found that he was accredited by the official organization of PFI. PFI has to be notified as a terrorist group. One State, Jharkhand, has notified it is a terrorist group. He was planning to incite riots. It’s a little bit like what happened in 1990. It is a fit case for invoking 124A also because they are creating disaffection using the rape of a minor girl.”
When the bench first mentioned granting bail to Siddeque Kappan in this case and allowing him to go to Kerala, advocate Mahesh Jethmalani strongly objected to it. Responding to his objection, the CJI said, “We will say, for the next 6 weeks he will be in Delhi and mark his presence in the local police station. After 6 weeks you can go back to Kerala but report to the local police station.”
Pronouncing the bail order, CJI said, “The appeal challenges Allahabad HC order. The appellant was taken in custody on 6 October 2020 and since then has been in custody in connection with the mentioned crime in connection with Section 17/18 UAPA, 153A 295A IPC, 65/72 IT Act. It appears that the charge sheet has already been filed on April 2, 2021, however, the matter has not been taken into consideration on whether charges need to be framed or not.”
The court further said, “However, considering the length of custody undergone by the appellant and the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, we direct as under – 1. The appellant shall be taken to the trial court within 3 days and shall be released on bail on conditions as deemed fit. 2. It shall be the condition of bail that the appellant shall stay within the jurisdiction of Jangpura in Delhi. The appellant shall not leave the jurisdiction of Delhi without the express permission of the trial court. The appellant shall record his presence at the local police station every Monday. This condition shall apply for the first 6 weeks.”
The order further mentioned, “After 6 weeks, the appellant shall be at liberty to go to Kerala but shall report to the local police station in a similar fashion, that is every Monday, and mark his presence in the register kept on that behalf. The appellant shall either in person or through a lawyer shall attend the trial court every single day. The appellant shall deposit his passport with the investigative machinery. The appellant shall not misuse the liberty and shall not get in touch with any of the persons connected with the controversy. Mr.Sibal points out that proceedings under PMLA have also been initiated against the appellant in connection with the appellant may be required to attend the proceedings to apply for bail. The conditions as stated above shall stand relaxed to the extent the appellant is required to avail of the relief of bail.”
Siddique Kappan was arrested by the UP Police on October 5, 2020, while he was proceeding to cover the Hathras case where a 19-year-old Dalit woman had died after a strangulation attempt. He was arrested along with three other persons, under stringent sections of UAPA and sedition charges for attempting to create a caste conflict in the state amidst the Hathras case controversy.
Apart from Siddique Kappan, Siddique of Nagla in Muzaffarnagar, Masood Ahmed of Jarwal in Bahraich district, and Alam of Kotwali area in Rampur district were arrested. Reportedly, all the arrested four had connections with the radical Islamic organization Popular Front of India (PFI) and were planning to cause caste-based unrest in the state.
