In a dramatic courtroom showdown in the Delhi riots conspiracy case, Sharjeel Imam’s counsel delivered a passionate defense, asserting that his client never endorsed violence but instead preached non-violence throughout his speeches. The arguments came during a hearing at the Karkardooma Court, where the lawyer meticulously dissected the prosecution’s claims.
The advocate highlighted key portions of Imam’s public addresses, particularly those made at Shaheen Bagh and Jamia Millia Islamia in early 2020, just before the northeast Delhi riots erupted. ‘At no point did Sharjeel Imam incite or support violent acts. His words were a call for peaceful resistance against the Citizenship Amendment Act,’ the lawyer stated firmly.
Drawing from historical precedents, the defense compared Imam’s rhetoric to Mahatma Gandhi’s principles of satyagraha, emphasizing non-violent civil disobedience. They argued that phrases like ‘cut off Assam from India’ were metaphorical expressions of political dissent, not literal calls to arms.
Prosecutors, however, painted a different picture, alleging Imam’s speeches fueled the communal tensions that led to over 50 deaths and widespread destruction in February 2020. The court has reserved its order on the bail plea, with the next hearing scheduled soon.
This case continues to spotlight free speech boundaries amid India’s polarized political landscape, raising questions about sedition laws and protest rights. Legal experts predict the verdict could set important precedents for similar UAPA cases.