Thread by @barandbench

All accused to appear before a Delhi Court in the conspiracy case in FIR 59/2020 registered under provisions of Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act. #DelhiRiots #UAPA

Court assembles.

Advocate Adit Pujari for Natasha Narwal and Devangana Kalita says he had filed an application under Section 207 CrPC for electronic evidence on April 8. "Five months have gone by and no reply has been filed."

SPP Amit Prasad: What they are asking for all digital data that has been seized or pertaining to all devices seized. During the course of probe, police called a lot of persons and devices seized. Some are accused, normal personal and some neither accused nor normal.

Prasad: Volume of data is huge and data contains personal of people whose equipment has been seized. If I give, I'll be infringing on their privacy. For me to say I will give A and not give Y.

Prasad: I will have to examine and come to conclusion that these are the data either personal or financial. There is no shortcut method. It is going to take time. I will file a reply.

Prasad: Can personal pictures be given. Can the privacy be infringed. That is the point. It is going to take time.

SPP: We need to make a distinction to what they are asking.

Court: There has to be an outer limit.

Advocate Tusharika Mattoo: They should at least give a list of documents they have relied upon according to Supreme Court directions.

Mattoo: They should file a reply to that effect where they say they need time.
SPP: It can't be peace-meal.

Mattoo: We have written repeated emails. This is for the first time the reply has come.
SPP: We have given what we have relied on in the chargesheet. What you are asking is over and above the chargesheet.

SPP: An order has come from this court. I will file a reply. I need time.
Mattoo: This is the first time this objection is coming. He may file a reply.

Court to SPP: Whatever objections you have, file it.

SPP: For Asif (Iqbal), they asked a cloned copy of his phone. We have said matter is investigation.

Adv Sowjhanya Shankaran (for Asif) reads prosecution's reply. "They have filed 3 chargesheets. 65 odd pages that they claim they have retrieved from my phone. They haven't provided recording of the speeches. They also rely on 5 WhatsApp groups that they claim from my phone. "

Shankaran: Bounden duty of prosecution to ensure fair investigation and complete disclosure of what is being relied upon. They have relied on some chats. There should be opportunity for me to contest.

Shankaran: It can't be their argument that under 207 application can't be pressed. Alleged speeches, cats... I need to know entire content of what they are relying upon. If prosecution can't pick and chose what they rely upon. That is not fair disclosure.

Shankaran: They can't take out one chat out of hundred chats and then say yaha pe ye bola hai.

Shankaran: You have already relied on content of the phone. Give me my phone.
SPP: FSL report has not come. Investigation qua voice is pending. Sharjeel Imam I had not objected. Pending investigation it can't be release (for Asif).
Shankaran: I'm asking for a clone.

SPP: I can't be distributing material

Court: Ask when the FSL report would come. I'll pass some orders on next occasion. I'll pass a direction for FSL report.

Next date September 30.

Khalid Saifi's counsel: We have filed a plea over confusion of Saifi being produced in some other matter.
Court asks Saifi: You were produced in some other Court. Has it happened again?

Khalid Saifi: After I addressed you, it hasn't happened.
Saifi: I read in the papers something on starting a speech with Assalam-o-alaikum, is it a law? I should stop if it is illegal.
Court: It is not the word of the Court. It is a submission made by the prosecution. #DelhiRiots

Khalid Saifi: When I come out I will file a case against Delhi Police in NGT. They wasted 2 million papers in filing chargesheet. #DelhiRiots #CAA