2020 Delhi Riots: ‘United against Hate’ Founder Khalid Saifi Moves HC

United Against Hate’ founder Khalid Saifi on Thursday approached the Delhi High Court against invocation of the charge of attempt to murder against him in a case related to the communal rights that erupted in parts of the city in February 2020.
The senior lawyer appearing for Saifi argued that once the offences under the Arms Act were dropped against him, and neither any weapon was recovered nor the alleged gunshot was attributed to him, the charge under section 307 (attempt to murder) IPC can’t be framed.
Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri, however, orally said that in view of the statements of witnesses about Saifi’s presence at the place of the incident and “provocation”, he was not inclined to entertain the plea.
“I will pass the order,” the judge said. “Act of one, act of all. It will be open to you to cross-examine whether you were present or not,” the court observed.

Communal clashes erupted in northeast Delhi on February 24, 2020, following a confrontation between supporters of the citizenship law and protesters, leading to at least 53 deaths and around 700 injuries.

AS per the FIR registered at Jagat Puri police station, a mob had gathered in Masjidwali Gali in the Khureji Khas area of northeast Delhi on February 26, 2020. The crowd refused to comply with the police’s order to disperse, threw stones, and assaulted police personnel. The FIR also mentioned that someone fired a gunshot at Head Constable Yograj.

The prosecution alleged that Saifi and former Congress councillor Ishrat Jahan had incited the “unlawful assembly.”

In January, the trial court ordered the framing of charges, including those related to attempted murder, rioting, and unlawful assembly, against Saifi, Ishrat Jahan, and 11 others. The charges were formally framed in April. However, all 13 were discharged from charges of criminal conspiracy, abetment, common intention, and offenses under the Arms Act.

Saifi’s lawyer argued that the revision petition was limited to the invocation of Section 307. She contended that Khalid Saifi, who was one of the organizers of the protest in Khureji Khas, was himself a victim of custodial torture and that there was no evidence, including CCTV footage, to show that he was part of the unlawful assembly or incited the violence.

“Firing took place separately. I am not connected to the firing. For the invocation of Section 307, the only evidence is that someone fired, and there is no injury resulting from the firing,” the counsel argued.

“Once they dropped the Arms Act charges against all of us and proceeded to separately prosecute the juvenile for the firing—who has now been acquitted—there is nothing to suggest that Yograj even suffered a scratch. The test of credibility must be applied.”