A Delhi Court today remanded fifteen persons arrested in the aftermath of the protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act at Daryaganj.

The fifteen persons who were remanded to judicial custody have been taken to Tihar by the Delhi Police.

The bail plea will be heard by the appropriate authority on Monday.

All fifteen were produced before the Duty Magistrate, Tis Hazari Arjinder Kaur.

The arrests were made in connection to an FIR under Sections 147/148/149/436/427/323/353/332/186/120-B/34 IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act.

As per the contents of the FIR, on December 20, pursuant to an inciting speech by the Bhim Army Chief, Chandra Shekhar Azad after Friday prayers, thousands of people began marching from Jama Masjid to Delhi Gate.

It claims that the protest was without permission and was in the nature of an unlawful assembly. Later in the evening, when the protestors began pelting stones at Police, water cannons were used to disperse the crowd. However, a car was set on fire by an unruly mob.

Seeking 14 days judicial custody of all 15, Delhi Police Prosecutor argued that act was planned and done in a premeditated manner and the investigation is ongoing.

As per the contents of the FIR, on December 20, thousands of people began marching from Jama Masjid to Delhi Gate yesterday after Friday prayers, following a speech by Chandra Shekhar Azad of the Bhim Army.

It adds that the protest was without permission and it constituted an unlawful assembly. Later in the evening, when the protestors began pelting stones at Police, water cannons were used to disperse the crowd, it is stated. It also mentioned that a car was set on fire by an unruly mob.

The Prosecutor in the case today informed that only one arrested person has not been produced. The other 14 have been produced. The Prosecutor further sought 14 days judicial custody for all 15 detainees.

Senior Advocate Rebecca John opposed the plea for grant of judicial custody. She also informed the Court that a bail plea is being moved simultaneously.

Inter alia, she argued that most of the offences listed are bailable in nature.

John also referred to Section 3 of the Prevention of damage to public property act , and the definition of public property under the Act.

“How is this Act being invoked against them when the damaged property does not qualify as public property?” John asked

She added that the detainees were men aged between 22-25 years. They are daily wagers, carpenters.

“What is the individual role attributed to these 15 men?”, John asked, as she contended that there was no common intention, She added that the detainees had probably gone to the mosque to pray.

John further submitted that one arrested person is a juvenile aged 15 years.

In response, the Investigating Officer countered that the investigation is at an initial age and that after verification of age, further action would be taken. He added that as per that person's statement, his age is 23.

Meanwhile, Advocate M Pracha, who appears for Azad, sought the details of Azad's whereabouts. Pracha remarked that he is not even aware whether Azad is alive or dead.

In response, the Delhi Police officer present also replied that he does not know where Azad is presently.

The Judge observed that perhaps the officer is not involved in the case concerning Azad.

The Delhi Police, however, submitted that Azad will be produced before court in due time.