Thread by @manuvichar

The reasoning in the order is absolutely muddled. Still an attempt to break it down :

1. Court says there is prima facie case of conspiracy for road blockade as part of CAA protests. That's at max an IPC offence, which is bailable.

#safoorazargar

livelaw.in/top-stories/pr…

2. From that the judge jumps to UAPA. Basis? Says attempt to bring a city to its knees and govt to grinding halt is "unlawful activity" under UAPA.

That itself is a sweeping statement, with no legal basis. Anyhow what is the evidence that she did that? Road blocakde it seems.

3. Next says she is part of conspiracy. But no evidence.Judge says acts of co-conspirators will operate against her. But what are the acts of co-conspirators. No discussion at all.

4. Judge skips over evidence discussion saying "if you play with ember, you cannot blame wind for carrying the spark far". With such rhetoric, judge paints with too broad a brush to say UAPA and conspiracy charges are attracted.

5. Then says Sec 43D (5) bars bail if there is a prima facie case. And the prima facie case is based on a lot of speculations, arrived at using round about logic. A more logical and clinical approach was expected to say there was prima facie case, considering stringent UAPA.

6. Above all, the humanitarian aspect. A pregnant woman with health issues in an overcrowded prison amid pandemic! That too when there is no overt criminal act alleged against her.

We have the likes of Kapil Mishra, who made open instigation , still roaming out free.

7. In short, the order is plainly unjust, illegal, inhuman and even barbaric.

#safoorazargar