The Delhi High Court on Tuesday reserved its verdict in the bail pleas of Gulfisha Fatima and Shifa-ur-Rehman, president of the Alumni Association of Jamia Millia Islamia University (AAJMI), booked in the police’s “larger conspiracy case” pertaining to the 2020 Northeast Delhi riots.

A division bench of Justice Suresh Kumar Kait and Justice Manoj Jain reserved the matters after hearing the arguments by all the parties on both merits as well as the applicants’ pleas seeking parity with the bail granted to three other co-accused in the case — Asif Iqbal Tanha, Natasha Narwal, and Devangana Kalita. The three were granted bail by the Delhi High Court in 2021.

In the last hearing, the bench had asked the Delhi Police’s counsel to take instructions and state whether the investigation would continue or would be closed. On Tuesday, the counsel said the status of the probe could be explained by the investigation officer (IO).

“Ten days may be given so that the Investigating Officer is here and he can exactly explain the status of the investigation,” the counsel said. Stating that certain results from the Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) were awaited, the counsel said, “Supplementary charge sheets will come, because the moment FSL results come, those have to be placed by way of supplementary charge sheets before the trial court. There is no other way”.

On the filing of the fourth supplementary chargesheet in June 2023, the counsel said certain applicants had moved pleas under Section 207 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) seeking certain data, and the “stand of state was rather than giving it to one and not giving it to another, we would rather make it part of the supplementary chargesheet and file it before the court”.

On the issue of parity with the co-accused on bail, Senior Advocate Salman Khurshid, appearing for Rehman, said the police had not said a word on parity in the High Court “there are much more serious questions as far as Rehman’s character is concerned”.

The police’s counsel argued that parity also has to be seen in relation to the denial of bail to Umar Khalid, stating that the High Court had in its October 2022 judgment had taken a view that there was a conspiracy.

Khurshid submitted, “None of the witnesses have said that this was a conspiracy to bring the country into disrepute”.

“Violent protest is unacceptable. But to say that any form of protest, chakka jam, or sit-in amounts to conspiracy for a terrorist act would be destroying the very basis of the jurisprudence of liberty in the country. Liberty must prevail,” said Khurshid.

Meanwhile, appearing for Fatima Advocate Sushil Bajaj submitted his client is entitled to claim parity as no court has concluded that the bail granted to Natasha Narwal and Devangana Kalita in 2021 was wrongly granted.

Gulfisha Fatima and Shifa-ur-Rehman, along with several others, were booked under provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) and the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for allegedly being the “masterminds” of the 2020 Delhi riots.

As violence erupted during the protests in Delhi against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), 53 people were killed and over 700 injured in the riots.