The Crossbill News Desk
In a significant development likely to accelerate proceedings in the 2020 northeast Delhi riots “larger conspiracy” case, the Delhi High Court on Wednesday, June 18, revoked the transfer of Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) Sameer Bajpai.
ASJ Bajpai had been presiding over the case since September last year and was hearing arguments on the framing of charges on a daily basis before being transferred on May 30.
His sudden transfer had drawn criticism from lawyers, who argued that it would further delay an already prolonged trial plagued by incomplete investigations and frequent judicial reshuffles.
The Hindu reported that following Bajpai’s transfer, his replacement, ASJ Lalit Kumar, had ordered fresh hearings in the matter. With the High Court now reversing the transfer order, ASJ Bajpai will resume charge of the case, a move welcomed by legal representatives involved in the trial.
“The pace at which the case is moving can be gauged by the fact that of the 18 accused booked under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, among other charges, most have been in jail for over four years,” a lawyer familiar with the case said on condition of anonymity.
The Delhi Police have alleged that the communal violence in February 2020, which claimed over 50 lives, was not spontaneous but part of a “deep-rooted conspiracy.”
The case involves prominent activists and public figures including former Delhi councillor Tahir Hussain, student leaders Umar Khalid, Khalid Saifi, Ishrat Jahan, Meeran Haider, Gulfisha Fatima, Shifa-Ur-Rehman, Asif Iqbal Tanha, Athar Khan, Safoora Zargar, Sharjeel Imam, and Natasha Narwal.
The prolonged incarceration of several of the accused without trial has drawn sharp criticism from civil rights groups and families, who have repeatedly pointed to the Supreme Court’s jurisprudence that “bail is the rule, jail is the exception.”
Critics have questioned what they call the selective application of this principle in politically sensitive cases.
Last year, S.Q.R. Ilyas, the father of accused Umar Khalid, had voiced concerns about judicial independence while addressing a public meeting organised by the Association for Protection of Civil Rights (APCR) in Delhi.
With ASJ Bajpai returning to the bench, legal experts and families hope that the pace of the trial will now pick up, providing long-awaited clarity and movement in a case that has been dragging on for over four years.
ASJ Bajpai had been presiding over the case since September last year and was hearing arguments on the framing of charges on a daily basis before being transferred on May 30.
His sudden transfer had drawn criticism from lawyers, who argued that it would further delay an already prolonged trial plagued by incomplete investigations and frequent judicial reshuffles.
The Hindu reported that following Bajpai’s transfer, his replacement, ASJ Lalit Kumar, had ordered fresh hearings in the matter. With the High Court now reversing the transfer order, ASJ Bajpai will resume charge of the case, a move welcomed by legal representatives involved in the trial.
“The pace at which the case is moving can be gauged by the fact that of the 18 accused booked under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, among other charges, most have been in jail for over four years,” a lawyer familiar with the case said on condition of anonymity.
The Delhi Police have alleged that the communal violence in February 2020, which claimed over 50 lives, was not spontaneous but part of a “deep-rooted conspiracy.”
The case involves prominent activists and public figures including former Delhi councillor Tahir Hussain, student leaders Umar Khalid, Khalid Saifi, Ishrat Jahan, Meeran Haider, Gulfisha Fatima, Shifa-Ur-Rehman, Asif Iqbal Tanha, Athar Khan, Safoora Zargar, Sharjeel Imam, and Natasha Narwal.
The prolonged incarceration of several of the accused without trial has drawn sharp criticism from civil rights groups and families, who have repeatedly pointed to the Supreme Court’s jurisprudence that “bail is the rule, jail is the exception.”
Critics have questioned what they call the selective application of this principle in politically sensitive cases.
Last year, S.Q.R. Ilyas, the father of accused Umar Khalid, had voiced concerns about judicial independence while addressing a public meeting organised by the Association for Protection of Civil Rights (APCR) in Delhi.
With ASJ Bajpai returning to the bench, legal experts and families hope that the pace of the trial will now pick up, providing long-awaited clarity and movement in a case that has been dragging on for over four years.
Comments (0)
Leave a Comment