Delhi Riots: Sympathy For A Cause Doesn’t Make Me A Conspirator; Shifa-Ur- Rehman Tells Court
Khurshid also highlighted that Rehman, president of the alumni association of Jamia Millia Islamia, was openly involved in organising peaceful demonstrations;
Delhi’s Karkardooma Court on Friday continued hearing arguments on charge in the 2020 Delhi Riots larger conspiracy case, with Senior Advocate Salman Khurshid arguing that "mere sympathy for a cause" cannot amount to participation in a criminal conspiracy.
Appearing for accused Shifa Ur Rehman, Khurshid submitted before Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) Sameer Bajpai that peaceful protest is a constitutionally protected right and cannot be criminalised. “Protest law is very clear, that protesting peacefully in this country is not prohibited. In fact, it is supported by courts,” he argued.
Referring to statements of protected witnesses codenamed “Hector,” “Beta,” and “James,” Khurshid contended that the evidence merely points to participation in protests and meetings, not to any unlawful activity.
He also highlighted that Rehman, president of the alumni association of Jamia Millia Islamia, was openly involved in organising peaceful demonstrations.
Addressing the prosecution’s allegations regarding funding, Khurshid pointed out that the sums involved were minimal. “We are still talking about very small amounts, Rs 65,000 to Rs. 1.5 lakh as mentioned by the witnesses. This cannot be painted as funding for a riot,” he said.
Responding to allegations of a “chakka jam” (road blockade), Khurshid clarified that such acts, even if unlawful, do not amount to violent attacks. “This is where trains or roads are blocked, which may be illegal, but it is not violence,” he explained.
The Senior Advocate argued that merely participating in daily meetings or coordinating protests cannot establish conspiracy. “Nobody has said what the discussions were about, and no one accepted that violence was planned in these meetings. Many of those mentioned are not even accused,” he pointed out.
Khurshid also criticised the prosecution's reliance on phone call data. He said the investigation showed thousands of calls on two numbers but the prosecution singled out a few calls to individuals like Meeran Haider and Safoora Zargar. “This selective reading does not establish any meeting of minds,” he argued.
“For a conspiracy to be made out, there must be circumstantial evidence of unlawful agreement. My case is that there is none,” Khurshid stressed. Concluding his submissions, he remarked, “Just because I’m sympathetic to a particular cause does not automatically make me a conspirator.”
The matter will continue on Monday, July 14, when Advocate Sowjhanya Shankaran is expected to make submissions on behalf of co-accused Asif Iqbal Tanha.
Previously
On the last hearing, on July 7, Senior Advocate Salman Khurshid appeared on behalf of accused Shifa-ur-Rehman, President of the Jamia Millia Islamia Alumni Association, and had commenced his arguments virtually in view of the ongoing lawyers' strike.
Khurshid had submitted a 35-page compilation along with a two-page note of judgments. He argued that the standard of “grave suspicion,” not mere suspicion, is essential for framing charges. "The trial court is not a post office simply forwarding the prosecution's case. It must independently examine the material placed before it," Khurshid chad ontended.
It is to be noted that on July 2, the Delhi Court had agreed to hear arguments on framing of charges in the 2020 North-East Delhi riots larger conspiracy case on July 7 at 12 noon, following a brief disruption due to an ongoing strike by lawyers at Karkardooma Court over the proposed digital court shift to Rouse Avenue.
On June 6, the Court noted that arguments would begin on July 2. “Considering the submissions of learned Special Prosecutors and counsels for the accused persons, the matter be put for arguments on charge on behalf of prosecution on 02.07.2025 at 12 noon,” the Court had stated.
Special Public Prosecutor Amit Prasad for the State had submitted that the prosecution will take approximately five days, on an average five hours per day, for concluding their arguments.
Counsels for the accused persons Tahir Hussain, Khalid Saifi, Tasleem, Safoora Zargar and Gulfisha, who had already advanced their arguments had told the Court that they will again start afresh, that too in a precise manner, so that the arguments on charge would be completed expeditiously.
The Court was also informed that the charge sheet runs over 17,000 pages, and given the volume, it was suggested that arguments begin after the summer vacation to maintain continuity. However, taking into account the right to a speedy trial and the time already elapsed, the judge fixed July 2 for commencement of arguments. ASJ Lalit Kumar had also observed that on the days the case is listed, no other major matter should be scheduled to ensure uninterrupted hearings.
Eighteen people, including Sharjeel Imam, Khalid Saifi, and former AAP Councillor Tahir Hussain, were booked under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) and several provisions of the Indian Penal Code for allegedly being the masterminds behind the 2020 communal riots that broke out in Delhi.
Case Title: State v. Tahir Hussain & Ors.