On the 9th and 10th of April, the bail petition of Umar Khalid, UAPA accused in the Delhi anti-Hindu Riots case, took an interesting turn. During the arguments in the Karkardooma district court, the Special Public Prosecutor (SPP) Amit Prasad made interesting revelations which were hitherto unknown. Opposing the bail of Umar Khalid, SPP Amit Prasad read out chats between Umar Khalid and several other celebrities, media houses, journalists and ‘activists’ to demonstrate how whether in jail or outside of it, there has been a consistent narrative to affect the judicial process and tilt the scales of justice.
On the 9th of April, the SPP during his arguments opposing Umar Khalid’s bail petition read out chats between Umar Khalid and several others, to demonstrate how when he was out of jail, right after the Delhi anti-Hindu Riots, he was trying to influence the public narrative to influence the judicial process and the investigation. The prosecution named several celebrities and activists who were in contact with Khalid. Notably, Khalid regularly sent them reports by The Wire, The Quint and other publications to set a narrative on social media. What emerged from the OpIndia investigation also is that the instructions sent by Umar Khalid were dutifully complied with by these ‘celebrities’.
Who was Umar Khalid chatting with right after the Delhi anti-Hindu Riots to create a favourable narrative
1. Sushant Singh
The chats between Sushant Singh, the Savdhan India actor, were read out by the Defence counsel in a prior hearing on 21st March, in an attempt to discredit the submissions made by the prosecution.
Senior counsel Trideep Pais argued before the bench that Umar had sent a report published by the leftist media portal The Quint to actor and ‘activist’ Sushant Singh to ‘expose’ the Delhi police.
OpIndia found that the WhatsApp chat which was mentioned by Umar Khalid’s lawyer Trideep Pais indeed has merit because Sushant Singh did, on June 11, 2020, as instructed by Umar Khalid, shared the link from The Quint where the media portal claimed that police accused Khalid, Tahir Hussain, and others of hatching conspiracy on 8th January 2020 during a meeting. However, the first reference to the possible visit of Donald Trump to India was only made on 13th January 2020, five days after this meeting took place.
In conversation with Sushant, Khalid asked him to post the link to this report by The Quint, which the actor obliged.
2. Congress leader Jignesh Mevani
The prosecution mentioned WhatsApp chants between Umar and Jignesh Mevani. He pointed out that Khalid sent Jignesh a link to a report by The Wire and requested that he share it on Twitter. “Bro, we should amplify”, was the message by Umar Khalid.
3. Yogendra Yadav
The prosecution shared a conversation between Yogendra Yadav and Khalid. Yadav in the chat confirmed he had tweeted just as Umar had instructed him to.
It is pertinent to note here that Yogendra Yadav is mentioned in the conspiracy chargesheet as well.
The entry of Yogendra Yadav in the conspiracy hatched, according to the chargesheet, dates back to the 7th of December 2019. This was only days before the Jamia violence erupted and several areas of Delhi saw violence. It was also days before Tahir Hussain admitted that he had started inciting people against CAA and pelted stones against the Hindus on the 17th.
By the 7th of December, Umar Khalid and Yogendra Yadav had met Shajreel Imam. While the initial mobilisation had already started between the 5th and 7th of December, it is the events of the 8th of December that we will analyse in this report.
On the 8th of December 2019, a meeting was held between Yogendra Yadav, Sharjeel Imam, Umar Khalid and others at a Jangpura basement. The image of this meeting has been included in the chargesheet by the Delhi Police.
It was in this meeting, that according to the chargesheet, a plan was hatched on how to implement the Chakka Jam. It was decided that it would be Sharjeel Imam who would organise and lead students from various universities and colleges in and around Delhi. It was, interestingly, also decided that organisations like United Against Hate and Swarajya Abhiyaan would help each other in every way possible. This has, according to the Chargehsheet, been revealed by a witness.
4. Raghu Karnad
Like Sushant Sigh, Raghu Karnad, a ‘journalist’ with several Leftist portals, was also sent links by Umar Khalid to share on social media.
5. Swara Bhaskar
Umar Khalid was also in close touch with actor Swara Bhaskar. In his chats with Swara, Umar Khalid had told her to create a narrative in favour of Dr Kafeel Khan. In another chat, he had told Swara that Shaheen Bagh protestors in Park Circus, Kolkata, wanted her presence.
6. Rasika
In May 2020, he had a conversation with Rasika, and he said he needed help amplifying social media posts. Actor Rasika is the wife of actor Zeeshan Ayyub. Rasika had extended support to Umar Khalid “as a Hindu”, however, she has a long history of collaborating with Umar Khalid and her husband, Zeeshan, was one of the people at the forefront of spreading misinformation against CAA. A detailed report can be read here.
7. AltNews
The SPP also read out conversations between Umar Khalid and a ‘journalist’ from AltNews. AltNews asked if they could quote Umar Khalid, but Umar Khalid said he didn’t want to be quoted, so AltNews complied. The conversation was about how the story regarding Umar Khalid should be written.
Other than these individuals, the SPP demonstrated how while he is in jail, there is a consistent effort to create a narrative in his favour by spreading misinformation on media platforms. The SPP played an interview of SQR Ilyas, Umar Khalid’s father and former SIMI terrorist, with TheWire’s Arfa Khanum Sherwani. The portion played by the SPP in court demonstrated how Ilyas, also one of Umar Khalid’s lawyers and the petitioner for bail, was lying about the court proceedings to tarnish the judicial process by creating a public perception.
Ilyas lied about several details of the proceedings during his interview with TheWire. In this interview, while Ilyas spread misinformation, there was no counter-mounted by Arfa Khanum Sherwani. Ilyas in the interview lied about the adjournments and also the law about filing FIRs and what Umar Khalid is accused of. A full report on the lies by Ilyas in the interview can be read here.
On the 10th of April, the SPP continued to demonstrate how while Umar Khalid is in jail, several elements are continuing to create a narrative in the media and on social media to tilt the scale of justice in Umar Khalid’s favour. The SPP named Aakar Patel, Teesta Setalvad, Amnesty International, Azhar Khan, Kaushik Raj and Swati Chaturvedi.
The SPP mentioned how these elements constantly and strategically run hashtags right before the bail hearing of Umar Khalid in an attempt to influence the judicial process.
After the hearing, several supporters of Umar Khalid claimed that the facts mentioned by the SPP hold no value given that Umar Khalid was free to talk to people and that others like Teesta, Aakaar etc were free to support him while he was in jail. However, unsurprisingly, they missed (maybe deliberately) the larger point. Essentially, the close coordination between the people mentioned and Umar Khalid only points to the fact that the conspiracy of the Delhi anti-Hindu riots and the narrative which was run globally after an influential group of people closely coordinated the violence. This speaks to the very definition of a conspiracy and becomes an important factor while deciding the bail application of an accused. If the Judiciary is convinced that the accused might tarnish the judicial process and/or the investigation while out on bail, the court would not grant the application of the accused.
Deliberate and coordinated delay in trial gives further credence to how the accused are trying to game the judicial process
In the Delhi anti-Hindu Riots cases, especially concerning the conspiracy case (FIR 59/2020) there has been a consistent effort to game the judiciary in favour of the accused.
On the 14th of February, Umar Khalid, represented by Kapil Sibal, withdrew his bail application (SLP) from the Supreme Court. The stated reason was a “change in circumstances”, however, the lawyer had failed to mention at the time what these changes in circumstances were. However, a deeper analysis by OpIndia revealed how possible attempts were being made to forum shop.
This was not all, Kapil Sibal also withdrew a separate petition questioning the legality of certain sections of the UAPA, especially dealing with bail. This petition had been tagged with others that had similarly challenged the nature of UAPA. The other writ petitioners, including the Foundation for Media Professionals and individuals — the latter have accused Tripura Police of slapping FIRs under UAPA for their social media posts and fact-finding reports on communal violence in the State — have sought time to consider the option of withdrawing from the Supreme Court to move the respective High Courts. The various petitions were represented by senior advocate Huzefa Ahmadi and advocate Prashant Bhushan, Cheryl D’Souza, and Jaimon Andrews.
While there have been statements attempting to insinuate that the ‘change in circumstances’ could perhaps be the time being taken by the Supreme Court to dispense with the bail petition, a peak under the hood revealed a different story.
While SQR Ilyas went on The Wire right after the withdrawal of the application and spoke about the 14 adjournments in the Supreme Court insinuating that one of the reasons that the bail petition was withdrawn was because of delay in trial (this is the same interview that was played in court by the SPP), in reality, out of the 14 adjournments in 2023 and 2024, 7 delays and adjournments were sought by Umar Khalid himself.
Further, it was on the 31st of October when a Supreme Court bench of Justices Aniruddha Bose and Bela Trivedi tagged Khalid’s bail petition with other matters challenging the constitutionality of provisions in the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967. The petitions include Khalid’s writ petition challenging the UAPA provisions, and the UAPA Charges Related to Tripura Violence where FIRs were filed against lawyers and journalists who undertook a fact-finding mission in the Tripura violence of October 2021.
It is also on the 31st of October that the saga of adjournments by Kapil Sibal was triggered.
A perusal of the chronology also revealed that the incessant adjournments demanded by Kapil Sibal could be because they did not want Justice Bela Trivedi to hear the bail application of Umar Khalid. This fact was also proved by the fact that in December, Prashant Bhushan had shot off an angry letter to CJI Chandrachud over the Tripura matter, with which Umar Khalid’s plea was tagged, being listed in front of Justice Bela Trivedi instead of the CJI himself. There were other letters too complaining of irregularities in cases being listed in front of Justice Trivedi – by Dushyant Dave and Abhishek Manu Singhvi.
Abhishek Manu Singhvi at the time, in a hearing related to Satyendra Jain’s bail petition mentioned the ‘irregularity’ in the case being listed in front of Justice Trivedi, which was promptly shut down by the CJI.
From the timeline investigated by OpIndia, it is evident that after the exit of Justice Aniruddha Bose, Umar Khalid and his lawyers – Kapil Sibal to be precise – demanded adjournments ad neuseum till the petitions were withdrawn. Further, it is evident that Prashant Bhushan also attempted to ensure that the case was listed before the CJI, a proposal struck down by Justice Bela Trivedi. This poses an important question of whether Kapil Sibal was “trying his luck” at forum shopping and having failed at that, withdrew his petition from the Supreme Court.
The full analysis can be read here.
There is another instance where the attempt to ‘game the system’ and delay the trial and game the system to give advantage to those still in jail without bail was apparent. This instance is one from 2023.
On the 18th of September 2023, Umar Khalid, Tahir Hussain and some others submitted in the District Court that they wanted arguments on charges to begin by the prosecution. It must be kept in mind that in the Umar Khalid bail application being heard currently in the Karkardooma Court, the defence lawyer Tridip Pais had specifically argued that the charges have not even been framed against Umar Khalid and therefore, due to the delay, Umar Khalid should be granted bail. This was, of course, one of the arguments made by the counsel.
Coming back to the developments of 2023 – while Umar Khalid and Tahir Hussain insisted that they wanted the prosecution to start arguments on the formation of charges, there was an application submitted in court by UAPA accused Devangana Kalita and Natasha Narwal. These two are Pinjda Tod ‘activists’ who were an intrinsic part of the Delhi anti-Hindu Riots conspiracy. When they filed the application in the case, they were out on bail. What is also to be kept in mind is that in the current proceedings in the Umar Khalid bail case, defence counsel Tridip Pais has constantly asked for bail on the grounds of parity with Devangana and Natasha (even though the High Court had categorically mentioned in their judgement that bail granted to Devangana and Natasha would not be treated as a precedent for rest of the co-accused).
In the application moved by Natasha Narwal and Devangana Kalita, they essentially demanded a status report on the investigation by the Delhi Special Cell. They demanded that the Special Cell must provide a report on the status of the investigation BEFORE the arguments on charges start by the prosecution. They argued that the Police had filed 1 chargesheet and 4 supplementary chargesheets in the conspiracy case. If the arguments on charges commence, the police can file other supplementary chargesheets in the court of the hearing to “cover up” the gaps in the investigation that the defence would point out.
What was far more interesting in their application is that they also demanded a status report as to why some of the others who featured in the conspiracy have not been made accused and questioned what the status of the investigation was against them.
When the application was filed, a follow-up application on the same line was also filed by accused Meeran Haider, Asif Iqbal Tanha and Athar.
Once these applications were filed, accused Khalid Saifi, Faizan Khan, Ishrat Jahan, Sharjeel Imam, Safoora Zargar, Saleem Malik, Shifa-ur-Rehman, Shadab Ahamd and Gulfisha Fatima adopted the same arguments – which essentially means that they became party to the application without moving an application themselves.
At that time, SPP Amit Prasad made his opposition to the application clear in the court of Justice Amitabh Rawat. He said that the status of investigation as far as the accused or those who were not made accused was between the court and the prosecution. “In the name of the rights of accused, the applicants cannot give such an application. When a right is not given to the accused, in garb of that they cannot file such an application”, he submitted.
“These prayers are speculative and presumptive … These prayers go on the assumption that framing of charges attains finality,” he had said. “This frivolous application was filed on the day when arguments on charge were to begin. It was on 1:45 pm suddenly, when two accused opposed the hearing. They waited for a good 40 days. They made sure to wait till the time the prosecution opens the case. They disrupt the entire proceeding and then say they don’t want to delay the trial”, the SPP had argued.
What the SSP had essentially said was that the accused who moved the application seeking a status report of investigation waited 40 days before bringing up this point, which had no legal backing, to begin with. It was on the 5th of August that the judge had said that the arguments on charges would begin on a day-to-day basis. The arguments were to start on the 11th of September. Just as the argument was about to begin, these applications were moved in a bid to delay the hearing. Infact, while the judge had directed for day-to-day hearings from the 11th of September, Asif Iqbal Tanha moved his application on the 12th of September and Devangana and Natasha moved their application on the 14th of September.
Thereafter, it was on the 18th of September that the very same application was filed by Meeran Haider. On the same date, the same application was also moved by Athar.
It was also on the 18th that others had submitted that they adopt the same arguments.
While these accused tried to delay hearings, Tahir and Umar wanted the day-to-day hearings to start.
Now, this would peg an important question. Why were those out on bail trying to delay hearings for those who were still in jail?
In the current hearing on Umar Khalid’s bail petition in the Karkardooma District Court, the SPP mentioned that they were was a deliberate delay by the accused in the hearing so that later, those in jail could claim that they deserve to be let out on bail because of the delay in hearing.
Firstly, it is important to mention that those accused have no legal locus standi to demand a status report of the investigation against those who are not named as accused in the case. It is the prerogative of the police. It is entirely possible that some of them may have turned approvers in the case. On the contrary, if they suspect that the police have deliberately not made certain individuals as accused, they can approach only after the investigation is over. Right now, the special cell even in their supplementary chargesheets has mentioned that the investigation is ongoing.
Therefore, it is evident that the purpose of filing these applications was to delay the arguments and hearings on the formation of charges. This was done specifically so that the defence lawyers of those still in jail, like Umar Khalid, can then claim in court that the prosecution has still not framed charges against the accused and there is an inordinate delay in the hearing. Owing to the delay, they can then ask for bail.
It is no surprise that right after this fiasco, there were several articles in Left media like TheWire talking about the delay in hearings.
Newslaundry had started building that narrative as well.
In September 2023 itself, the SPP had said that this is also a larger conspiracy by those accused in the Delhi Riots case to delay trials so that eventually, those who are not out on bail can benefit from such delays.
The chats between Umar Khalid and others, and the social media storm in his support by those like Teesta Setalvad, Aakar Patel etc, have to be viewed in this light.
There is a concerted effort to influence the judicial process and use tactics by those out on bail to delay hearings. As a result, those who are in jail are being facilitated to use the “delay in trial” argument to demand bail. Meanwhile, those like Teesta, Aakar Patel and others mentioned including SQR Ilyas create a narrative about justice being denied because of the delay in trial in the hopes that a public narrative would sway the decision of the court.
How it all started
Most chargesheets filed in the Delhi anti-Hindu riots case so far have a detailed chronology of events attached to them which starts from the events of December. One has to recall that on the 15th of December, violence broke out in Jamia Millia Islamia. The chargesheet says that some students, ex-students of Jamia and people associated with political parties congregated to protest the CAA and NRC and wanted to march towards the Parliament House and Presidents House. When stopped, they started pelting stones and indulging in violence.
In the process, busses were burnt, cars were damaged, 2 public persons got injured and 10 police personnel also suffered injuries.
It is interesting to note that while the violence broke out on the 15th of December, on the 14th of December, Sharjeel Imam had delivered his provocative speech at the very site. He had urged Muslims to protest against CAA and NRC by doing ‘chakka jam’ on the 14th of December. On the 15th of December, protestors tried to block Mathura Road and violence ensued.
Following this, the dispersing crowd retreated inside Jamia and a fresh cycle of violence started. The usual suspects had proceeded to blame the police was trying to enter a college campus and brutalising students, however, the truth was far from it. It was in fact these ‘students’ who had started the violence and the police were merely trying to control the violence.
The chargesheet mentions that right after the violence of 15th December, the Jamia Coordination Committee was coordinating protests and blockages of roads. They had called several leaders to speak to the protesting Muslims as well. The chargesheet mentions Harsh Mandar who had instigated people on the 16th of December (though he has not been named as an accused so far).
The Shaheen Bagh protest then started, on cue, from the 15th of December. While the Shaheen Bagh protest raged on, on the 17th of December, violent mobs started pelting stones in the Jaffrabad area.
Thereafter, from the 15th of January, Muslim protestors blocked roads in 7 different areas in the name of protests. Provocative slogans were raised and incalculable inconvenience was caused to commuters.
Here are the 7 roads that were blocked:
- Seelampur – Opposite Medina Masjid (from the 15th of January)
- Dayalpur – Brijpuri Pulia near Farrukhia Masjid (from the 17th of January)
- Dayalpur – Chand Bagh Majar on Bhajanpura (from 17th of January)
- Jyoti Nagar – Kardam Puri Pulia near Ashharfia masjid (from 17th of January)
- Khajuri Khas – A block main road, Shri Ram Colony (from 17th of January)
- Bhajanpura – Noor-e-Lahi near petrol pump (from 18th January)
- Shastri Park – Near Wahid Jama Masjid (from 26th of January)
It is pertinent to note that people from the Chand Bagh Mazar protest site had also tried to block the main Wazirabad Road.
The chargesheet categorically states that the riots were pre-planned and not spontaneous. On the 22nd of January night, women, children and several Muslim protestors blocked the Jaffrabad metro station after Chandrashekhar Azad’s call for Bharat Bandh. It is pertinent to note that is also said that Pinjra Tod and JCC were instrumental in the instigation and implementation of the blockage of the Jaffrabad metro station. On the 23rd, there was a counter-rally which demanded the opening of the road that had been blocked by anti-CAA crowds. The Muslim side started pelting stones first, as even mentioned in the chargesheets. On the 24th, full-fledged riots began with the first life being claimed being that of constable Ratan Lal after being attacked by a Muslim mob.
What Umar Khalid is accused of in the Delhi anti-Hindu riots
The first evidence of Umar Khalid’s role in the Delhi Riots came when a speech made by him surfaced. The speech was allegedly made on the 20th of February in Amravati. In the speech, he was clearly heard saying that on the 24th of February, when President Donald Trump visits India, Muslims should ‘show’ the visiting US president that the people of India are fighting against the ruling party of India.
The entire speech was about 17 minutes long where Khalid invoked the false narratives of ‘targeted mob lynching’ against Muslims and then went on to say that when the Muslims did not revolt against the Ayodhya judgement by the Supreme Court, the government took it for granted that they can bring any law against Muslims.
Inciting the crowd further, saying the CAA has been brought to harm Muslims, Khalid says that the people should show the government its ‘Aukaad’, and take to the streets to throw it out. He further says that if enough people take to the streets, first the CAA will go, then the NPR and then NRC, and eventually the government will also go.
It was 4 days after this speech, on the 24th of February, as Umar Khalid had predicted, that riots broke out. Ankit Sharma was stabbed over 50 times by the mobs of Tahir Hussain. Dilbar Negi’s arms and legs were chopped off and he was burnt alive by Muslims. Amidst chants of Allahu Abkar and Nara e Taqbeer, Hindus were specifically targeted.
The Left and Islamist cabal found nothing wrong with this speech. They called it a peaceful speech and said there was nothing in it that incited violence. They find nothing wrong with the fact that Umar Khalid, only 4 days before riots broke out, had specifically mentioned the date 24th of February and said that on that day, they would “show” how they fight with the government.
But was Umar Khalid’s role limited to just this speech?
In the chargesheet filed in FIR 114, the role of Umar Khalid in the conspiracy hatched is mentioned clearly. It says that Tahir Hussain was connected to Khalid Saifi of United Against Hate Group and through Saifi, he was also in touch with Umar Khalid. Khalid Saifi, it says, had arranged a meeting between Umar Khalid and Tahir Hussain on the 8th of January at Shaheen Bagh. In that meeting, it was decided to take ‘big action’ so the government gets shaken up on the issue of CAA and NRC and also, ensure that the international community takes notice of that action.
In the chargesheet, it is also mentioned that Umar Khalid had told Tahir Hussain not to be concerned about the funding for the riots as the Popular Front of India (PFI) would provide the funding as well as logistic support. It was categorically mentioned that the riots were to take place when President Donald Trump would visit India.
In the chargesheet, as reported, here is a flowchart of the coordination between Umar Khalid, Pinjra Tod ‘activists’, Khalid Saifi and Tahir Hussain.
From everything that is alleged in the chargesheet, it is clear that Umar Khalid was perhaps one of the masterminds who was also constantly in touch with Pinjra Tod activists who are also accused of grave sections. Khalid Saifi of UAH, who is also a close associate of Umar Khalid was coordinating with Tahir Hussain after their initial meeting in Shaheen Bagh on the 8th of January. Further, Tahir Hussain was coordinating with other rioters and instigators. There are several other pieces of evidence as detailed by the Special Cell of the Delhi Police in their main chargesheet and the 4 supplementary chargesheets.
