Read Time: 04 minutes
Sharjeel Imam was taken into custody in January 2020 after he allegedly delivered several provocative speeches that were accused of inciting violence during anti-CAA demonstrations in Delhi and other states.
Sharjeel Imam, on Friday, appeared before the Delhi High Court contending that two cases were initiated against him based on the speech he delivered at Jamia Millia Islamia University regarding the Citizenship Amendment Bill.
The bench of Justice Sanjeev Narula, due to paucity of time, adjourned the matter for April 24, 2025.
Sharjeel Imam, on December 12, in his bail petition claimed that “There is absolutely nothing in any chats showing that I incited violence of any kind”. Advocate Talib Mustafa, for Imam, further claimed that Imam has been in judicial custody for over 5 years with no prospect of the case initiating soon.
Background:
These cases against Imam were filed under the anti-terror law Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) against Imam for allegedly making inflammatory speeches in the Jamia area in Delhi and Aligarh Muslim University (AMU), during the protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) and National Register of Citizenship (NRC) in 2020.
Notably, two speeches delivered by Sharjeel Imam in December 2019 were included in the charge sheet. The first address was delivered in Delhi on December 13, 2019, and the second one was delivered in Aligarh on December 16. His remarks allegedly incited violence on December 15, 2019, during protests against the Citizenship Amendment Bill (CAB) in Jamia Nagar, Delhi, according to the police.
In September 2024, the Delhi High Court rejected the early hearing petition filed by Sharjeel Imam for his pending bail petition maintaining that the bail plea would be heard on the already scheduled date.
Imam's bail plea has challenged the order, dated 11 February 2022, wherein the Additional Sessions Judge Sameer Bajpai of Karkardooma court had previously denied any relief to the JNU student stating that Imam's speeches intended to create 'public disorder' and 'incitement to violence' and also appeared to challenge the territorial integrity and sovereignty of India.
The Supreme Court, recently, refused to entertain an Article 32 petition, noting that Imam could not have moved an Article 32 petition before the top court while his bail plea was pending before the Delhi High Court.
For Imam: Advocate Ahmad IbrahimCase Title: Sharjeel Imam Vs State Govt [W.P.(Crl)-1715/2023]
Please Login or Register
