Senior Advocate Trideep Pai: On the date of registration of FIR, there existed 750 FIRs registered well before.
With respect to each incident of violence be it serious, of a death. Be it less serious. First submission was that there was no occasion to register the FIR.
Pai: An FIR is registered as per Lalitha Kumari on the language of the complaint but there is certainly an underlying crime. Veracity is not subject matter. The chargesheet shows that there was, in fact, no crime.
Pai: The video relied upon was reported by news agencies which was tweeted by a politician. I have played the speech; with the greatest respect I submit that there is no illegality in that speech.
Pai: In this case, the burden of proof remains on the prosecution. One of the biggest theories is that there was a conspiracy on 8 January. The protected witness, Saturn, either speaks under pressure or with a forked tongue.
Pai: The witness has made a different, inconsistent statement in another FIR you cannot take it seriously. You cannot put statements in water tight compartments.
Pais reads out another statement: He clearly says that he knows Khalid Saifi from before and has seen Umar Khalid on TV. How does he suddenly remember on 29 July in another FIR?
Pais reads out witness statement dated 27 September:
They procured this statement right before arresting me. So, to sum up Saturn, he makes two statements in each FIR.
Pais: 21st May 2020, he is blissfully unaware of 8 Jan. But in July, he not only speaks of it, but he also goes into the PFI office. Then he says in August, I did not go inside. Again, in September he says I was waiting outside.
Pais: I will no longer labour on malice, malice is a given in this FIR. I am trying to transcend malice and tell your Honour, there is no way these statements are consistent with each other and meet the test under UAPA.
Pais: Can we rely on this witness to keep a man in jail? Where he does not even remember this epic meeting that happened on 8 Jan. I will show witness after witness, this is what they have done.
Sr. Advocate Pais: Second is, the chargesheet has statements but you as prosecution portray the rhetoric in your head which has no basis in statement or event.
"This is the fertile imagination of the police officer who drafted it."
Thirdly, procured witnesses like Saturn.
Senior Advocate Pais: They say in Amravati I give a भड़काऊ भाषण.
Your honour saw the video. There is a bunch of tame people sitting and listening to someone speak.
Pais: First is, they misquote a public event, which is on record, but the prosecution is trying to portray it as terror. For this I’ll be showing two instances. One is the speech in Amravati.
Pais: The second- screen shares chargesheet and reads out: “Umar Khalid, a veteran of sedition.” This is sounding like a script. Where are they getting this?
“Harbinger of the call- BHARAT TERE TUKDE TUKDE HONGE.” Yeh kahan se mila?
Pais: in 2016, the same police station filed a chargesheet against me.
In 2016, there was a poetry reading session by a group of students who were broadly left, this was opposed by a group of students who were broadly right.
Pais reads out the section of the chargesheet that is titled, “evidences against Umar Khalid”: Please come to what they enumerate as evidence against Umar Khalid.
Pais: How did you produce, “Bharat Tere Tukde Honge”, in this chargesheet? It was not in the previous chargesheet.
If you were truthful, you would have annexed the previous chargesheet to this. 17,00 pages have been annexed, why not this? I am appalled.
Pais: I want to show you where you can give proof for what you have said against me. You have not, because there is NONE. What I have shown you is a WHITE LIE.
Pais reads out chargesheet: “After a roller coaster of secular progressive activism.. what we see of Umar Khalid in 2020 is unapologetic proponent of political Islamic extremism..” This reads like one of those screaming news channels.
Pais reads out chargesheet: “..previous brush with law, was clear in his mind that when Delhi will be thrown in fire, he shall be keeping a safe physical distance to create the perfect alibi if the conspiracy gets exposed..”
Pais: This type of statement shapes public opinion by being picked up by irresponsible media. No matter what Your Honour says today, public opinion is being shaped.
Pais reads out chargesheet: “..with his intellectual acumen, he knew very well a large majority of Indian Muslims will never prescribe to the perverted definition of Islam being espoused by his disciple Sharjeel Imam..” Where is this from? Who said this?
Pais: All the material highlighted in green sent to your Honour has no basis and cannot be relied upon for considering my bail. These portions were just added to create an idea in the mind of the public.
Pais reads out chargesheet: Not a single witness to back the statement “..for use of social media for large scale indoctrination and mobilisation of youths for Chakka Jaam as a protest against CAA. It was also decided that Masjids should be the focal point...”
Pais: If there is basis for this statement, who is communal? If there is no basis for Masjid as focal point, who has given this a communal colour? Not me!
Pais: “The experience of the key conspirators from half baked successes and failures over the past two weeks made them realise that in order to achieve their true objectives there was a need for a gender cover and media cover…”
Pais: No witness said that there was a strategic picking of blockade points. There is a constant effort to give it a communal colour, “..predominantly minority clusters where 24*7 sit in dharna were being held..”
Pais: He is not writing the script of Family Man. This is a chargesheet. Reads chargesheet, “..discloses association with rabid activists like Nadeem Khan..”
Pai: Reads chargesheet, “was all geared towards giving the protests a profound communal colour..” I’m sorry the only one giving communal colour is THIS.
Pais: they have attempted to create public opinion in light of lack of evidence. You wouldn’t have to resort to this if you had evidence against me. 59 is a skeleton within which you can bring anything.
Pais reads chargesheet, “while his vision for political Islam was being propagated by small, committed Islamists using groups like MSJ, SOJ etc… a wider rainbow alliance having secular façade..”
Pais: Who has said it was a façade? Where is the proof? The movement WAS secular. The chargesheet is communal. What is the message the protestor is giving you? “I belong to this country, and I want to belong to this country.”
Pais: Reads chargesheet, “the ease and poise with which Umar Khalid was navigating both the ideologies indicate that this position in the overall power matrix was very, very close to the very top.”
#SupremeCourt is hearing plea by students who have qualified JEE Mains 2021 in their 3rd attempt seeking accommodation to appear for JEE (Advance) Exam for 2021 #JEEAdvanced
Adv Sumanth for petitioners: The petitioners here are those have qualified JEE Mains & are seeking permission to appear for #JEEAdvanced
#SupremeCourt: did you approach the authorities? Once the decision is taken after deliberation, then how can we allow it again?
SC: How can we relax that condition, it'll be a policy matter.?
Supreme Court bench led by CJI NV Ramana to hear petitions challenging the constitutional validity of Tribunal Reforms Act 2021 and the case pertaining to mounting vacancies in various tribunals across India #SupremeCourt#TribunalVacancies#TribunalReformsAct
In an affidavit filed by the Centre on Tuesday, it was submitted that no recommendations made by any of the SCSCs now remain pending with the government.
#SupremeCourt is hearing a plea seeking rehabilitation for the Jhuggi dwellers who were evicted after forest areas were cleared by the Municipal Corporation of Faridabad at Khori Gaon in Faridabad, Haryana
The Faridabad Municipal Corporation (FMC) has submitted before the Supreme Court a housing policy for rehabilitation of persons affected by the demolition of Khori Gaon jhuggis in Faridabad, Haryana
#BombayHighCourt to decide shortly whether the plea filed by ex-State Home Minister #AnilDeshmukh can be heard by a single judge or by a division bench of the High Court.
SG Tushar Mehta: I need some time to prepare. Please grant me two to three days
Justice MR Shah: Please argue we will continue
Sr Adv Arvind Datar: there is a letter for adjournment
Justice Shah: we are not adjourning. Mr. Mehta this is an important issue and it has to be decided. Everyday speculation in newspapers. everything will end with the case
Justice Shah: Do you want to file a rejoinder Mr Mehta?
SG: Yes, my Lord
Justice Shah: we cannot compel you to file a counter. its a policy decision.