New Delhi [India], August 11 (ANI): The Delhi High Court on Tuesday heard the arguments on the bail plea of Amol Dhanraj Shinde, an accused in the Parliament security breach case.
Opposing the bail plea, Delhi Police said that the accused are part of “a deep-rooted conspiracy” and argued that Dhanraj Shinde “was a key conspirator and attended five conspiratorial meetings”.
The counsel for Delhi Police said that the accused purchased the smoke canisters and his case cannot be tested on parity with the other accused, Neelam Ranholia.
Division bench of Justices Prathiba M Singh and Vikas Mahajan heard the submissions by advocate Balraj Singh Malik for Dhanraj Shinde and Additional Public Prosecutor (APP) Ritesh Bahri for Delhi Police.
The bench has directed the counsels to file their written submissions on the bail application of Dhanraj Shinde. The court has listed the bail plea of Lalit Jha for hearing on August 31.
Bahri submitted that Dhanraj Shinde attended “five conspiratorial meetings” while Ranholia attended two such meetings.
The counsel submitted that chats showed that the accused persons “were extending” the threat made by Khalistani separatist and designated terrorist Gurpatwant Singh Pannun.
On the point of parity, the prosecution submitted that accused Mahesh Kumawat was granted bail as he was not in Delhi and that there is no parity between the roles of the accused.
The prosecution also submitted that there “was a conspiracy for an aggressive protest”. Peaceful protest is allowed, not aggressive protest.
“This is a case where conspiracy is apparent, the accused entered the Parliament and jumped into the well (of Lok Sabha),” the counsel mentioned.
Bahri also referred to the chargesheet and the statement of witnesses.
As per the allegations, the canister was purchased by Sagar Sharma and Dhanraj Shinde. The prosecution said there is an Instagram chat besides other material.
Malik contended on behalf of Dhanraj Shinde that conspiracy allegations are being made though the accused had no arms and ammunition and entered the Parliament building with valid passes.
“We are conspirators for raising our fundamental rights. We did not go to the shop for arms and ammunition. Canisters were those used in film production,” he said.
The Court noted the submissions by the defence counsel that Dhanraj Shinde had not entered the Parliament and he was outside on the footpath alongwith Ranholia and cannot be treated differently.
It was also submitted that the accused entered Parliament with valid passes issued by the members of Parliament. As to how the passes were issued to them, no inquiry has been done on this aspect, Malik argued. The accused have a constitutional right to demonstrate, he added.
It was also argued that Section 15 (terror activity) of UAPA does not apply to the accused persons and that they were raising the slogan Vande Mataram.
Bahri argued that Dhanraj Shinde is a key conspirator and the “intention was to create terror in the minds of people”.
He also addressed the arguments on Section 15 of UAPA and said no actual incidents are required to have happened to attract the section.
He also referred to the statement of witness Vishal alias Vicky, who stated that the intention was to organise “ugra pradarshan”. He said that the prosecution has not delayed the trial and it is delayed due to administrative reasons.
Malik said all the members are equally responsible in a conspiracy.
He emphasized that the accused intended to organise a peaceful protest, not intended to disrupt the Parliament and no weapon was used. (ANI)
Related reading
