Prime Time With Ravish Kumar: 3 Student-Activists Arrested In Delhi Riots Case Released On Bail https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y3Z5ME2ERhM Three student-activists, arrested for alleged role in Delhi riots case, walked out of Delhi's Tihar jail, hours after a court ordered their immediate release. Ms Narwal, Ms Kalita and Mr Tanha had moved the trial court for their immediate release after they remained imprisoned past the 1 pm deadline set by the High Court yesterday. They were ordered to be released on personal bonds of ₹ 50,000 each and two sureties of a similar amount.
Natasha says no regrets for what they did, but regret that the movement was cut short
https://twitter.com/HemantSorenJMM/status/1405034800730152966
HM in a post: The government knows that the case is fake, and conviction is very unlikely. The punishment is only by process, mainly almost indefinite incarnation without any opportunity to prove their innocence
S, PUCL in a post
Once bail is granted, delaying release makes the custody illegal and the remanding judge is accountable for the illegality.
You have Chandrachud's ruling in Arnab Goswami case pontificating how right to life and liberty is sacrosanct and every hour of illegal custody is a violation of a person's rights.
SC Says Delhi HC's UAPA Bail Order Won't Have Precedent Value, but Protects Activists' Freedom https://thewire.in/law/supreme-court-uapa-bail-delhi-hc-narwal-kalita-tanha By holding that the high court judgments granting bail to the activists will have no value as precedents, the vacation bench of the Supreme Court appears to have gone against the ruling of another bench of the court recently.
On April 14, the Supreme Court bench of Justices D.Y. Chandrachud and M.R. Shah, deprecated the practice of passing orders suffixed with the caveat that the said order is not to be treated as a precedent on the ground of parity, especially in criminal matters. “It indicates a lack of confidence in one’s own order. My decision is my decision. Saying that it is not to be considered as a precedent shows a lack of moral conviction in one’s own viewpoint. If I feel that an order is vulnerable, I should not pass it at all,” remarked Justice Chandrachud. He added, “Also, it is for the other judge (who is likely to hear a similar matter) to decide if it can be treated as a precedent or not.”
With UAPA After Bengaluru Riot, Innocence Or Guilt Of 163 Men Is Immaterial MOHIT RAO 12 Oct 2020
A wife finds CCTV footage that could prove her husband innocent. He is among 163 Muslims charged—the largest number ever in Karnataka—with terrorism for a night of rioting in Bengaluru. But lawyers say it could be months, even years, before evidence is considered because the anti-terror law allows detention without bail or trial.