Is organizing protests sufficient to invoke UAPA? Delhi High Court asks police in Delhi riots case

The Delhi High Court on Monday asked whether setting up protest sites against the Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA) was sufficient for the Delhi Police to invoke Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) against accused in the Delhi riots conspiracy case..The Division Bench of Justice Navin Chawla and Justice Shalinder Kaur raised the question after the police opposed the bail plea of accused, citing chats of WhatsApp groups related to the protests against CAA."Is it your case that only setting up of a protest site is good enough for UAPA or is it your case that protest site which resulted in a violence is good enough for a case under UAPA. But most importantly, for us, it is the intent, under UAPA, which has to be established," the Court said.The Court was hearing the bail petitions moved by the accused including Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam, Gulfisha Fatima, Khalid Saifi and others who have been in the prison for many years. .The Court today observed that people were protesting against a law and may have felt that even a chakka jam (road blockade) was a valid protest.It then asked that whether holding of chakka jam would be sufficient to invoke UAPA."You culled down the conspiracy that there are WhatsApp groups. In the WhatsApp groups, (if) there are instigation and a hint of violence and violence actually happens, till then if they are involved, you may say UAPA is attracted. But when you draw attention... your argument is well they were organizing protest sites, is that good enough?"Special Public Prosecutor (SPP) Amit Prasad explained that was the reason why not everyone who were part of WhatsApp groups were booked. The Court then asked the SPP to point out specific evidence against the accused which would show that they were instigating violence rather than merely having protests..Since the trial court is yet to frame the charges against them, the accused have sought bail mainly on the ground of delay in trial.However, the prosecution on Tuesday cited judgments holding that mere delay in trial cannot be ground for bail and also blamed the accused for causing delay in trial. .Selective action?.During the hearing today, the Court questioned Delhi Police for selectively naming people as accused in the conspiracy case on the basis of WhatsApp chats"In the conspiracy, how can you leave these two... conspiracy is actually evidenced, according to you, by their messages," Justice Chawla remarked, while referring to certain members of the WhatsApp groups in question..SPP Prasad submitted that there are a lot of messages. "It is about 2000 or more," he said.When the prosecution showed videos of the public gatherings and protests, the Court pointedly asked the SSP what he was driving at."All this [violence] happened, we know ... this is neither here nor there. This whole thing happened, we know," it remarked while asking how it was connected to the chats being cited by the prosecution. SPP Prasad later in the hearing took the Court through a chart allegedly showing the involvement of the accused in WhatsApp groups that allegedly organized the protests.On the conspiracy, Prasad contended that the protests were not organic but were organized in a planned manner. .The hearing in the matter will continue tomorrow.