Read Time: 05 minutes

Synopsis

In the bail plea filed by Salim Malik@ Munna, in connection with the northeast Delhi Riots 2020, registered by the Delhi Police against him, Senior Advocate Salman Khurshid today contended, “There are no specific allegations, only general allegations have been made for his presence”, before the Delhi High Court.

On behalf of Malik, Khurshid submitted that he was challenging the trial court’s order dated October 6, 2022, denying him bail in the matter. He stated that Malik was booked under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act by the Delhi Police for allegedly hatching a larger conspiracy in the Delhi Riots in February 2020.

On the contrary, Special Public Prosecutor (SPP) Amit Prasad opposed the plea and argued that Malik was part of the conspiracy. He contended that Malik has been seen in a video, where is clearly tampering with the CCTV camera during a riot. He also stated that he was part of the “secret meetings” of 16 and 17 February 2020, which were organized to plan Chakka Jam at Chand Bagh.  

Prasad submitted that Malik is seen in videos attending the “secret meetings”, along with Suleman Siddiqui, Athar Khan, Saleem Khan, and Shadab. He further stated that there are statements from witnesses that support the allegations. SPP argued that CCTV camera footage showed the mobilization of all 26 functional (out of 33) cameras on February 24, 2020.

Taking note of the submissions, a division bench of Justices Siddharth Mridul and Rajnish Bhatnagar directed SPP Prasad to make the video showing Salim Malik tampering with the CCTV camera available on their desktops on the next hearing. Accordingly, the court listed the matter for further hearing tomorrow, i.e. February 21.

Notably, Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) Amitabh Rawat of the Karkardooma Court, had dismissed Salim Malik’s bail after noting that the allegations against him are that he was one of the main organizers of the Chand Bagh Protest site during the Delhi Riots 2020.

The Judge had said, “On perusal of the chargesheet and accompanying documents, for the limiter purpose of bail. I am of the opinion that allegations against the accused Salim Malik@ Munna are prima facie true. Since there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accusations against the accused are prima facie true. Hence, the Embargo created by Section 43D of UAPA applied for the grant of bail to the accused and also, the embargo contained in Section 437 CrPC”.

Case Title: Salim Malik@ Munna v. State NCT of Delhi

Statue: The Code of Criminal Procedure; The Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act