Is setting up protest site enough to attract UAPA, asks Delhi HC

Is it your case that only setting up a protest site is enough for UAPA or those protest sites resulted in violence? But the most important thing is intent under UAPA which has to be established. DELHI HIGH COURT

- Shruti Kakkar

The Delhi high court on Wednesday questioned whether setting up protest sites against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) justified booking the accused in the Delhi riots conspiracy case under the stringent Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA), underscoring that establishing intent to commit a terror act is crucial for invoking UAPA provisions.

A bench of justices Navin Chawla and Shailender Kaur posted the query to special public prosecutor (SPP) Amit Prasad, who was opposing the bail petitions of student activists Sharjeel Imam, Gulfisha Fatima, former Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) student leader Umar Khalid, United Against Hate (UAH) founder Khalid Saifi.

Prasad had contended before the court that the Delhi Police had gathered evidence in the form of chats from multiple WhatsApp groups, which conspired to organise protest sites for the riots that took place in February 2020. He contended that it showed that there was a meeting of mindset and connection between the accused.