Human Rights Defenders Data Information Knowledge Solidarity

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.

https://www.indiatoday.in/india/video/delhi-hc-order-gives-us-lot-of-hope-and-strength-natasha-narwal-1816248-2021-06-17

Natasha says no regrets for what they did, but regret that the movement was cut short

https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/delhi-court-devanagana-kalita-natasha-narwals-after-police-seek-time-for-address-verification-175797

https://twitter.com/HemantSorenJMM/status/1405034800730152966

https://indianexpress.com/article/cities/delhi/natasha-devangana-tanha-stay-in-custody-despite-bail-delhi-police-seeks-time-7362240/

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.

https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/delhi-court-releases-devangana-kalita-natasha-narwal-and-asif-iqbal-tanha-175836

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.

Why Delhi HC Bail Order for Natasha, Devangana & Asif Tanha in UAPA Case is Such a Big Deal | Arfa https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UILjbwNbqSI  जेएनयू छात्राओं नताशा नरवाल और देवांगना कलीता और जामिया मिलिया इस्लामिया के छात्र आसिफ इकबाल तन्हा पर उत्तर पूर्वी दिल्ली में फरवरी 2020 में हुए सांप्रदायिक हिंसा के लिए साजिश रचने का आरोप है. तीनों को मई 2020 में यूएपीए के तहत गिरफ़्तार किया गया था. 

Delhi police seems bent to suppress dissent at the JNU. Court has made clear difference between security of State, Public Order, and Law and Order.  and these cases dont come under security of stae level of problem.. It seems a normal issue of law and order.. and therefore does not attract 43D of UAPA.. 

'Right To Protest Not 'Terrorist Act' Under UAPA' : Delhi High Court Finds No Prima Facie Case Against Asif Iqbal Tanha, Natasha Narwal & Devangana Kalita LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK 2021-06-15 https://www.livelaw.in/amp/top-stories/right-to-protest-not-terrorist-act-uapa-delhi-high-court-asif-iqbal-tanha-natasha-narwal-devangana-kalita-175736 

Reiterating that right to peaceful protest is a constitutional right flowing from Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution, the High Court said :

"...the right to protest is not outlawed and cannot be termed as a 'terrorist act' within the meaning of the UAPA, unless of course the ingredients of the offences under sections 15, 17 and/or 18 of the UAPA are clearly discernible from the factual allegations contained in charge-sheet and the material filed therewith"

Even if it is assumed that the protests have crossed the line of peaceful protests permissible under Constitution, that will not amount to a 'terrorist act' under the UAPA.

"The making of inflammatory speeches, organising chakkajams, and such like actions are not uncommon when there is widespread opposition to Governmental or Parliamentary actions. Even if we assume for the sake of argument, without expressing any view thereon, that in the present case inflammatory speeches, chakkajams, instigation of women protesters and other actions, to which the appellant is alleged to have been party, crossed the line of peaceful protests permissible under our Constitutional guarantee, that however would yet not amount to commission of a 'terrorist act' or a 'conspiracy' or an 'act preparatory' to the commission of a terrorist act as understood under the UAPA"

The police argued that even acts which are "likely to strike" terror come under the ambit of Section 15 UAPA.

In this regard, the Court said :

"Having given our anxious consideration to this aspect of 'likelihood' of threat and terror, we are of the view that the foundations of our nation stand on surer footing than to be likely to be shaken by a protest, however vicious, organised by a tribe of college students or other persons, operating as a coordination committee from the confines of a University situate in the heart of Delhi"

The Court said that the chargesheet, which employed "superfluous verbiage", "hyberbole", "stretched inferences", "grandiloquence", did not reveal any prima facie offence. (The article gives links to the full text of all three judgements )