Northeast Delhi riots: After judge's transfer, where does the ‘larger conspiracy' case stand?
Out of the 18 accused arrested in the case, 12 have been in jail for over four years.
From October to May 2025, five accused — including former JNU student leader Umar Khalid, former AAP councillor Tahir Hussain, Shifa Ur Rehman, and Safoora Zargar — had completed their arguments on charge. The prosecution also completed its arguments during day-to-day hearings.
After the remaining persons finished their arguments, the trial of the case would've begun.
Family members and lawyers of the accused called the delay a 'punishment'.
Shortly after the riots broke out, which left 53 dead and 700 injured, the Delhi Police Special Cell started investigating the alleged conspiracy behind them. During its investigation, it booked the 18 accused under relevant provisions of the stringent Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) and IPC.
The case of the Special Cell was that the riots were the result of a months-long 'deep-rooted' conspiracy allegedly hatched after the Citizenship Amendment Bill got a nod from the Cabinet in December 2019.
Between 2020 and 2023, police filed four supplementary chargesheets. With their final chargesheet in June 2023, they marked the completion of their probe into the case. Their case was primarily built on CCTV footage, WhatsApp chats, and statements of protected witnesses.
In October 2023, Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) Amitabh Rawat of Karkardooma Court had directed that arguments on the charge be conducted on a day-to-day basis. Two months later, ASJ Rawat was transferred and ASJ Sameer Bajpai replaced him.
On September 4 last year, the Special Cell officially told ASJ Bajpai that they had completed their investigation. Following this, the judge ordered that arguments on charge would commence from September 5.
On May 30 this year, ASJ Bajpai was transferred following a reshuffle of 135 judges across Delhi.
'With the chargesheet of several thousand pages, more than 700 witnesses, other issues and such transfers, we don't know how long it will take. This is very unfortunate. Our sons and daughters are languishing in jail,' said Umar's father, Syed Qasim Rasool Ilyas.
'The problem is that section 43(D) of the UAPA lists extremely stringent bail conditions. The judge has to first make up their mind whether a prima facie case is made out or not. For this, arguments on charge need to be complete. It becomes impossible to get bail otherwise,' said advocate Rajiv Mohan, who represented Husain in court. Along with Mohan, advocate Tara Narula also appeared for Husain. Asif Iqbal Tanha, one of the six accused out on bail, told The Indian Express, 'For the people who are in jail, the delay in trial is very problematic. But even those who are out on bail have various restrictions.'
On June 2, ASJ Lalit Kumar, who replaced ASJ Bajpai, heard the case for the first time. The Delhi Police and the accused persons were directed by the judge to furnish their schedule regarding the time frame and manner in which they will address arguments. The court also stated that arguments on charge must be 'expedited'.
On June 6, ASJ Kumar asked the prosecution and the defence how long they would take to conclude the arguments. 'I will take 25-27 hours to outline the entire conspiracy… we have submitted a 1,200-page compilation. For the assistance of the honorable Court, I will keep it very concise,' Special Public Prosecutor Amit Prasad had said.
The 18 accused persons in this case are Devangana Kalita, Natasha Narwal, Ishrat Jahan, Faizan Khan, Safoora Zargar, Asif Iqbal Tanha (all six on bail); Tahir Husain, Umar Khalid, Khalid Saifi, Sharjeel Imam, Meeran Haider, Gulfisha Fatima, Shifa-Ur-Rehman, Shadab Ahmed, Tasleem Ahmed, Saleem Malik, Mohd Saleem Khan, and Athar Khan (all 12 in jail).
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
24 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Jagdeep Dhankhar draws curtains on a stormy Rajya Sabha run
Jagdeep Dhankhar, who resigned as the Vice-President late on Monday citing his health, is no stranger to disagreements with the Opposition. Dhankhar was elected Vice-President in August 2022 and his term as the Rajya Sabha Chairman began on a controversial note during the Winter Session that year as he called the Supreme Court's 2015 judgment striking down the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) Act a 'glaring instance' of 'severe compromise' of parliamentary sovereignty and disregard of the 'mandate of the people'. Since then, there have been several instances when he and Opposition MPs have not seen eye to eye. In August 2023, Dhankhar told the Opposition that he 'could not and would not' direct Prime Minister Narendra Modi to be present in the House as it was the PM's prerogative like any other MP to come to Parliament. He made this statement as the Opposition benches continued to demand the PM's presence in the Rajya Sabha to address them on the issue of violence in Manipur. The ties between the Rajya Sabha Chairman and the Opposition hit a low during the Winter Session last year when 146 MPs were suspended from both Houses of Parliament, mostly over their demand for Union Home Minister Amit Shah's statement on a Parliament security breach, followed by a discussion on the matter. It was the highest-ever number of suspensions in a Parliament session. As the proceedings came to a halt, Dhankhar wrote to Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge, the Leader of the Opposition (LoP) in the Upper House, about the 'acrimony and disruptions'. Kharge replied saying that 'he was firmly in favour of dialogue and discussion'. In his letter, Dhankhar highlighted that the latter's 'refusal to meet him to resolve the political stalemate' was 'not in sync with parliamentary practices' and sought a meeting. Kharge had declined Dhankhar's invitation and in a letter said that the mass suspension of MPs was 'premeditated' and 'weaponised' by the ruling party to sabotage parliamentary practices. In June 2024, Dhankhar courted controversy after Kharge entered the Well of House during a protest against paper leaks, with Dhankhar saying this was the first time that a LoP had done such a thing and called it a 'stain' on Parliament. Kharge responded by saying he was trying to grab the attention of the Chairman who was looking towards the Treasury benches. In July 2024, Rajya Sabha MP Kapil Sibal questioned the manner in which the Upper House was being run by Dhankhar and claimed that in no country the presiding officer of a House 'frequently interrupts' members during their speeches. The same month, Dhankhar said the RSS has 'unimpeachable credentials' and Constitutional rights to contribute to the development of the nation. 'RSS is an organisation which is a global think tank of the highest order…,' he said in the House while responding to a comment from Samajwadi Party MP Ramji Lal Suman that the government's main criterion for appointments was if a person belongs to the RSS. In September 2024, in an apparent reference to Lok Sabha LoP Rahul Gandhi, Dhankhar, without naming him, said nothing was more condemnable than someone holding a Constitutional post becoming 'part of enemies of the nation'. Dhankhar was speaking at Parliament to the third batch of the Rajya Sabha internship programme. During his visit to the United States that week, Gandhi said 'love, respect, and humility' were missing from Indian politics. In December last year, Dhankhar became the first person holding one of the top two constitutional posts to face the prospect of impeachment as the Opposition submitted a notice to move a no-confidence motion against him, a first in Indian Parliamentary history. However, after 60 INDIA bloc MPs gave a notice in the Rajya Sabha to bring a resolution for removal of Dhankhar, Deputy Chairman Harivansh rejected it, saying the petition was 'severely flawed', does not adhere to the requirement of 14 days' notice period and was 'drawn in haste and hurry' to 'mar the reputation' of Dhankhar and to 'damage the constitutional institution'. Earlier this year, in April, after the Supreme Court ruling set a three-month timeline for the President to decide on Bills referred by Governors of states, Dhankhar had said that India cannot have a situation where the judiciary directs the President. While the Supreme Court ruling addressed the long-running dispute between Governors and Opposition-ruled state governments, Dhankhar added that his worries are at the 'very highest level' and asked, 'There is a directive to the President by a recent judgement. Where are we heading? What is happening in the country?' Most recently, in June, Dhankhar waded into the political debate over the words 'socialist' and 'secular' in the Preamble, referring to their addition to the Constitution by the Indira Gandhi government during the Emergency as 'sacrilege to the spirit of sanatan'. 'These words have been added as nasoor (festering wound). These words will create upheaval. Addition of these words in the Preamble during the Emergency signal betrayal of the mindset of the framers of the Constitution,' he said. Before he was elected Vice-President, Dhankhar served as the Governor of West Bengal when he had several run-ins with the government of Mamata Banerjee and became a vocal critic of the state administration. From the law and order situation in the state and post-poll violence to corruption accusations, alleged lapses in bureaucracy and the appointment of vice-chancellors in state universities, Dhankhar never shied away from criticising the government, which accused him of sitting on important BIlls. The situation took a turn for the worse when the state government in 2022 replaced the Governor with the CM as chancellor of state universities. His relationship with Mamata Banerjee became so acrimonious that the CM even blocked Dhankhar on social media. His relationship with Speaker Biman Banerjee was no less bitter, with the Speaker in 2021 complaining to then President Ram Nath Kovind about Dhankhar allegedly interfering in matters of the government. Born into a farmer's family at Kithana village in Jhunjhunu district in 1951, Dhankhar studied at a local government school before going to Sainik school in Chittorgarh. He studied law at the University of Rajasthan and became a professional lawyer, going on to serve as the president of the Rajasthan High Court Bar Association. Dhankhar started his political journey with the Janata Dal and in 1989, he was elected to the Lok Sabha from Jhunjhunu. After that, he moved to state politics and was elected to the Rajasthan Assembly in 1993 from Kishangarh on a Congress ticket. He again tried his luck in the Lok Sabha elections in 1998 but lost from Jhunjhunu. Starting that year, Dhankhar served as a full-time senior advocate in the Supreme Court and in 2003 switched to the BJP. He advised the party on important legal matters.
Time of India
37 minutes ago
- Time of India
Dalit woman accuses neighbour of caste abuse, assault over electrical work
Ahmedabad: A dispute over underground electrical repair work in a residential society in Baroda village of Daskroi taluka escalated into serious allegations of caste-based abuse and physical assault between neighbours, with both parties filing complaints against each other. According to police, a 66-year-old Dalit woman alleged that her upper-caste neighbours hurled casteist slurs, physically assaulted her and her pregnant niece, and issued death threats following a disagreement over electrical work near her residence on Sunday evening. She stated that she had earlier warned the electrician not to dig too deep due to suspected underground wiring. When the electrician did not stop the work, a verbal argument reportedly turned violent. In her complaint, the woman alleged that members of her neighbour's family verbally abused her with caste-related slurs, seized her walking stick, and beat both her and her niece. She further claimed that her niece sustained injuries to her face and legs during the assault. As evidence, she submitted three video clips purportedly showing the verbal abuse and assault, and named two residents who allegedly witnessed the incident and intervened. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Waterthorpe: £19.99 Will-Writing Service Legacy Wills & Estate Planning Undo You Can Also Check: Ahmedabad AQI | Weather in Ahmedabad | Bank Holidays in Ahmedabad | Public Holidays in Ahmedabad Meanwhile, the neighbours filed a counter-complaint, alleging unlawful entry and assault by the Dalit woman and her niece. They claimed the duo barged into their home armed with a metal pipe and a wooden stick. The upper-caste complainant alleged that they were beaten and threatened with being falsely implicated in an atrocity case to force them out of the society. Police at Vivekanandnagar station have registered both FIRs under relevant sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) and the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. Further investigation is underway, police said.
Time of India
38 minutes ago
- Time of India
Jagdeep Dhankhar quits as Vice President: What he said in Rajya Sabha today; judge impeachment, cash under seat
N Tired of too many ads? go ad free now EW DELHI: Jagdeep Dhankhar on Monday resigned as Vice President citing health reasons and said that he made the decision to 'prioritise health care' and act on 'medical advice.' The announcement came just hours after Dhankhar, who also served as Rajya Sabha chairman, addressed the House and raised several serious issues, including the impeachment motion against a high court judge Yashwant Varma and an incident involving unclaimed cash found under a seat in the House. In a detailed statement, Dhankhar informed the members that he had received a motion for the removal of a high court judge Yashwant varma under Article 217(1)(b) read with Article 218 of the Constitution and Section 3 of the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968. 'It is signed by more than 50 members of the Council of States and thus it meets the numerical requirement,' he said. RS | Rajya Sabha Chairman Jagdeep Dhankhar's Remarks | 04:06 pm - 04:19 pm | 21 July, 2025 Explaining the technical procedure involved in such cases, Dhankhar pointed out the constitutional requirement of whether such motions are presented in one or both Houses of Parliament on the same day. 'If the motion is presented in the two houses on different dates, then the motion which is presented in the house first that alone is taken into consideration and the second motion gets nonjurisdictional,' he said. He directed the Secretary-General to verify if a similar motion had been moved in the Lok Sabha. The Law Minister, present in the House, confirmed that over 100 members had submitted such a motion there as well. Dhankhar also referred to an earlier motion from December concerning a another judge of the Allahabad high court Shekhar Yadav, PTI reported. He said the motion was initially signed by 55 members, but a scrutiny revealed that one MP had signed twice, bringing the total valid count down to 54. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now 'The result was that the representation, the motion indicated there are 55 members seeking removal. But actually it was not 55, it was only 54,' he noted. He said the process for verifying signatures and authentication is still ongoing. He added that one MP, whose signature appeared twice, denied having signed the motion more than once. 'If a motion carries two signatures of the same member and the honorable member declines that he has not signed at two places but he has signed only at one place, the matter becomes serious and culpable,' Dhankhar said, while stressing the need for Parliament to uphold transparency and integrity. 'This August House has to set very high standards. If we do not live up to the highest expectations of the people, then we'll be putting things under the carpet and not subjecting them to deep investigation,' he said. In a startling revelation, Dhankhar said that 'on seat number 222 a bundle of rupees 500 notes was found.' He added, 'What is more surprising and deeply concerning is not that a pad of notes was found but no one has owned it. No one has claimed it. This is quite serious.' He said the matter would be referred to floor leaders for further discussion and direction. Reacting to Dhankhar's resignation, senior advocate and Rajya Sabha MP Kapil Sibal said, 'I wish him the best of health, because I am saddened, because I have a very good relationship with him. I have known him for 30-40 years. We were paired with each other. We have appeared against each other in matters. We have a bonhomie between us that is quite unique. I always respected him, and he always respected me. He has been to some family occasions of ours, and I am saddened and I hope that he is healthy and has a long, long life, and I wish him well. We may have had differences, in respect to our political views, or on opinions, but at a personal level, we had a very strong bond. Whenever I needed time to speak in the House, I met him personally in his chamber, and he never refused me, and gave me a little more time than is otherwise available to independent members of Parliament.'
