AGENCIES
The Supreme Court on Friday refused to cancel the bail granted to three student activists – Natasha Narwal, Devangana Kalita and Asif Iqbal Tanha who are accused of conspiracy over the Delhi riots and have been charged under anti-terror law UAPA.
However, a two-member bench of Justices Hemant Gupta and V Ramasubramanian also said the Supreme Court would examine the bail order, noting that this case could have “pan-India ramifications” because of the way UAPA, or the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, had been interpreted.
This will be heard next month, the Supreme Court said as it issued notices to the activists and stressed that the High Court order could not, in the meantime, be used as precedent for other cases.
Ms Narwal, Ms Kalita and Mr Tanha walked out of Delhi’s Tihar Jail last night, two days after the High Court highlighted the distinction between the “right to protest” and terrorist activity, and granted bail.
Their release had been opposed by Delhi Police, which said the High Court, in permitting bail, had “conducted a mini-trial… (and) recorded perverse findings which are contrary to the record”.
At today’s hearing Delhi Police asked the Supreme Court to “stay the (High Court) order because (it) virtually records the acquittal of the accused” and others would seek bail using this as precedent.
“53 died and many were police officers… 700 were injured. The court says riots were controlled so UAPA is not applicable… How can the intensity of the offence be diluted?” Delhi Police asked.
“(Delhi) High Court watered down UAPA (and) it had been turned upside down,” Delhi Police claimed.
The top court acknowledged that discussing all laws in a bail hearing was “something very surprising”, and said: “We agree. There are many questions that arise. The issue is important and can have pan-India ramifications. We would like to issue notice and hear the other side.”