Former JNU student and alleged Tukde-gang member Umar Khalid was recently arrested by Delhi Police under the stringent provisions of the Unlawful Assembly (Prevention) Act, for his alleged involvement in the conspiracy behind Delhi riots that took place in February 2020. He was sent to 10 days’ police custody on 14 September.
What are the charges?
Delhi Police has alleged a larger conspiracy behind the Delhi riots. As per media reports, it has been alleged that the Delhi riots of February 2020 were pre-planned by Umar Khalid and others. He is accused of giving provocative speeches and urging people to come out on the roads to ensure that the propaganda of minorities being persecuted in India, may get publicised during the visit of US President Donald Trump which took place on February 24-25.
Police is also reported to have collected evidence in the form of WhatsApp chats for execution of the conspiracy, witness statements, and evidence of the receipt of funds from within India and overseas.
As per reports, the investigation is based on an FIR, in which Sections 302 IPC (murder) 153-A IPC (promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, etc.), 124-A IPC (sedition), have been applied. Sections 13, 16, 17, and 18 of the UAPA have also been added to the case subsequently.
It is apparently under these provisions of law that Umar Khalid has been arrested.
What are relevant provisions of UAPA?
So, what exactly are the tough provisions of the UAPA? Why is this law so much in news? What are the terror-related provisions in this law?
Section 13 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, provides for punishment for indulging in an unlawful activity. Any person taking part or committing, or a person who advocates, abets, advises or incites the commission of, any unlawful activity, is punishable with imprisonment for a term up to 7 years.
But, what is unlawful activity? It is defined under Section 2 of the UAPA to mean any action (whether by committing an act or by words, either spoken or written, or by signs or by visible representation or otherwise), in respect of claiming or inciting the cession of a part of the territory of India etc., or in respect of disrupting or is intending to disrupt the sovereignty and territorial integrity of India, or in respect of causing or intending to cause disaffection against India.
Section 16 of UAPA punishes a “terrorist act” with death or imprisonment for life where a death has occurred as a result of the act. In the present case against Umar Khalid, there were several deaths of persons in the Delhi riot case in which he has been arrested.
Now, what is a “terrorist act” which is punishable under Section 16? It is defined in Section 15 of UAPA to mean any act which is committed with intent to threaten the unity, integrity, security, economic security, or sovereignty of India or with intent to strike terror or likely to strike terror in the people or any section of the people; and, how such act should be by way of using bombs, explosives, firearms, etc., or by overawing by criminal force or causing (or attempting to cause) death of a public functionary, or by kidnapping or detaining a person etc. for certain purposes.
Section 17 of the UAPA punishes raising of funds for terrorist acts, and the punishment can be up to life imprisonment.
Section 18 of the UAPA, which is more relevant for Umar Khalid, provides for punishment to a person who conspires or attempts to commit, or advocates, abets, advises or incites, directs or knowingly facilitates, the commission of a terrorist act or who does any act preparatory to the commission of a terrorist act. The punishment can be up to imprisonment for life.
It should thus be clear that UAPA contains some stringent provisions for unlawful activities (as defined in the Act, as mentioned above) or for terrorist acts.
Can bail be granted under UAPA?
UAPA contains stringent bail provisions and it is very difficulty for an accused person to get bail under this Act. Section 43-D of this Act provides that firstly the Public Prosecutor has to be given a mandatory hearing in bail application. Secondly, it provides that such accused person shall not be released on bail if the Court, after perusing case records, is of the opinion that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accusation against such person is prima facie true.
Who enacted UAPA?
While the current Government is being blamed for such stringent legal provisions, the fact remains that UAPA was originally drafted in 1967 when Congress party was ruling India. Major amendments were made in this Act in September 2004 and then in 2008 (after Mumbai terror attack by Pakistan agents), and provisions relating to terrorist acts, were inserted during these amendments, and on both these occasions, the UPA Government led by Congress party was in power.
Justification given by Delhi Police for using UAPA
As per media reports, Delhi Police has told the court that the February riots in Delhi were a result of a bigger conspiracy to overawe the government machinery, and that the conspirators had a specific purpose, object and mandate to cause disaffection and revolt against the Government of India. It is noteworthy that these riots were deliberately instigated at the time of visit of US President Donald Trump to India.
Delhi Police has also reportedly told the court that the aim of the protests was to destroy, destabilise and disintegrate the Government of India in order to compel it to withdraw the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) and allegedly proposed National Register of Citizens (NRC).
In view of the fact that booking a prominent member of the alleged Tukde gang would provoke severe criticism from the liberal media, which is quite active in India, I am sure that Delhi Police would have done its home work and would have booked Umar Khalid only after collecting sufficient evidence in the matter.
And, if the charges levelled by Delhi Police are correct, then there is no doubt that it is a very serious case against Umar Khalid and other instigators and conspirators. A large number of people were killed during the February riots in Delhi and it was widely suspected that these riots were the result of a pre-planned conspiracy of certain individuals as a part of or continuation of the anti-CAA or anti-NRC protests. A stringent action is required to be taken against such elements, who had conspired to stage and/or provoke the Delhi riots.
Very well written and drafted . Explains sequence of events and applicability of act on Khalid who should be taken care of . These are more dangerous than Kasab as they are taking refuge Inder religion and constitution making mockery of law
Beautiful insight. Thank you.