Protests at Jamia Millia Islamia in 2019 was an unlawful assembly; mob wanted to violate law, march to parliament: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court on Tuesday held that the December 2019 protests organised at Delhi’s Jamia Millia Islamia was an unlawful assembly and the mob gathered at the spot with the intention to violate the law [State v Mohd Qasim and Ors]. .Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma said that the mob indulged in violent acts and wanted to march to the curfew bound area around the parliament. "The video clips of the incident tendered by the State to this Court, and also filed before the learned trial court, will reveal that an uncontrollable mob allegedly of students who had turned violent and had dandas in their hands, were pelting stones continuously, were pushing and pulling barricades, climbing barricades, were forcibly trying to go beyond the barricades which had been put up by the police to enforce rule of law, had pulled out and damaged the iron grill which was the road divider had pulled out and damaged the sign board of Police Station Jamia Nagar and the conscious presence and participation of the accused therein would point out towards their being part of unlawful assembly and rioting," the Court said.The judge said that the beginning of pelting of stones, pushing, kicking and breaking of barricades, violent insistence on marching to a curfew bound area marked the beginning of the end for the peaceful protest for the group."It (the mob) continued occupying the college campus gates and outside of it while continuing to pelt stones, bottles and tubes as one can hear in the announcements made through loud-hailer indicate that it was not a peaceful assembly to attract protection under the Constitution,” the Court said.It was State’s duty to prevent rioting and violent action and if it had not taken timely action, then it would have been blamed for being ineffective, the Court said."If no timely action was taken and the police force would have allowed the public property being put on fire and rioters being allowed to flout orders of Section 144 Cr.P.C. and reach the place where curfew had been imposed, the State would have been accused of dysfunctional and ineffective Government machinery who could not control eruption of violent collective action. The videos will prima facie reveal that the level of opposition which was encountered by the law and enforcing agency was probably not expected by them," the Court further said..On the role of the Delhi Police, the judge noted that the State did not engage in prior restraint nor did it restrain the protesters from protesting at the places where they had gathered to express their thoughts and convey their dissent.However, as the crowd turned violent and started marching towards curfew bound area, it gave rise to public safety concerns which necessitated restricting their movement, the Court noted. “The public safety concerns had arisen at the spot due to presence of large number of violent protesters and their conduct which had created a significant and imminent danger of injury to bystanders, media persons, public authorities, passersby and damage of public and private property… It was the behaviour of the crowd which gave rise to such apprehension, therefore, the argument that the protest was peaceful and is not covered under Section 141 IPC is a claim belied by the video clips and statements of the witnesses.”.The observations came as the Court overturned the trial court’s order discharging Sharjeel Imam, Safoora Zargar, Asif Iqbal Tanha and eight others in the case.In a detailed order, Justice Sharma charged Sharjeel Imam, Safoora Zargar, Mohd Qasim, Mahmood Anwar, Shahzar Raza, Umair Ahmed, Mohd Bilal Nadeem and Chanda Yadav under Sections 143 (unlawful assembly), 147 (rioting), 149 (every member of unlawful assembly guilty of offence committed in prosecution of common object), 186 (obstructing public servant), 353 (assault or criminal force to deter public servant), 427 (mischief) of the Indian Penal Code, as well as Section 3 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Properties Act.Accused Asif Iqbal Tanha, Mohd Shoaib and Mohd Abuzar was charged under Section 143 IPC only and discharged of all other offences..The Court also expunged the remarks of the trial court where it had criticised the Delhi Police. Among other observations, the trial court had said that the Delhi Police had made Imam and others a scapegoat.However, the High Court said that the remarks regarding dissent at the stage of charge should have been avoided."At this stage it would not have been clear to the learned trial court itself also as to whether it was the peaceful dissent suppressed by the State or State was trying to curb the menace of violence and spreading of violence and disturbance in the area concerned and working to protect others from violent protesters and ensure rule of law to those who were not part of this violent protest.”.The High Court also said that if any evidence comes on record against any of the accused persons during their trial regarding the offences they have been discharged of, the trial court may proceed as per law against them.“It is, however, clarified that this Court has not returned any finding on the merits of the case and the observations made hereinabove are only for the purpose of deciding present petition,” the Court concluded. .[Read Order]