The Delhi High Court granted bail to Pinjra Tod activists Devangana Kalita and Natasha Narwal, and also to Jamia Milia Islamia student Asif Iqbal Tanha, who were arrested under stringent anti-terror law UAPA in connection with the north-east Delhi riots that took place in February 2020. The UAPA case against the three pertains to a larger conspiracy behind the riots being probed by Delhi Police’s Special Cell. The police have claimed the violence that led to the death of 53 people and injured over 500 was not spontaneous but orchestrated. The HC said that right to protest, was part of fundamental rights and could not be bracketed as a terror act under UAPA.
Charges against the three accused
Tanha was a final year student at Jamia when he was arrested in May 2020, and has been in custody since. Both Narwal and Kalita were PhD scholars at Jawaharlal Nehru University and are closely associated with Pinjra Tod, a collective of women students and alumni of colleges from across Delhi. Later, they were also arrested in connection the UAPA case.
As per the police, Kalita and Narwal were part of WhatsApp groups and were aware of the acts of every conspirator. Therefore, they were equally liable for the violence. As members of Pinjra Tod, the two were accused of mobilising women in the north-east area and created a 24/7 protest site at Madina Masjid in Seelampur as part of a conspiracy. Tanha’s links to the riots was established as per the witnesses, which established that he was part of the premeditated conspiracy behind the incidents.
Origin of the Pinjra Tod movement
The ‘Pinjra Tod’ movement far left movement, comprising of women from colleges in Delhi University, Jamia Milia Islamia, Ambedkar Univeristy, National Law University and Jawaharlal Nehru University, grew out of a simple Facebook page, where female hostel and PG residents began sharing their bitter experiences with guards, wardens, principles, landlords and the like.
Stance of the Supreme Court
Delhi police approached the supreme court against the high court orders stating that this order would have larger ramifications on various other cases under the UAPA. The Supreme Court agreed to examine the Delhi High Court verdict granting bail to Pinjra Tod activists Devangana Kalita and Natasha Narwal, and Jamia Millia Islamia student Asif Iqbal Tanha. The following points were raised by the prosecution:
- This ruling virtually pronounces acquittal of the accused in a bail order
- The observations in the ruling regarding application of UAPA have far-reaching effect on other pending cases, including those accused in the Delhi riots case.
However, the Supreme Court agreed with the Delhi Police argument that the HC judgment has raised several questions, since it virtually comments on the constitutionality of UAPA even though that was not a subject matter before the court. The bench went on to order that the HC judgment “shall not be treated as a precedent and may not be relied upon by any of the parties before any court”. This means the HC order will remain operational for them, but at the same time it cannot be used as a basis by other co-accused in the case to seek bail.