The Delhi Police told the Supreme Court on Thursday that “intellectuals who turn into terrorists” pose a greater threat than ground-level actors, as it opposed the bail pleas of activists Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam and others in the February 2020 riots case.
Additional Solicitor General (ASG) S.V. Raju, appearing for the police before a bench of Justices Aravind Kumar and N.V. Anjaria, told the top court that the anti-CAA protests were part of a coordinated bid to topple the government and draw global attention during then US President Donald Trump’s visit.
Raju called the accused “anti-nationals” and “intellectual terrorists,” and argued that their role was more dangerous than that of ground-level operatives.
"A narrative is built that he is an intellectual, he is being hounded etc. That’s not the case. Intellectuals are many times more dangerous. See between the lines. The real purpose of the protest was regime change, strangulated the economic welfare, on a pan India basis. CAA protest was just a red herring. This has resulted in death of 53 persons including a police man who was lynched. An IB officer was also killed. More than 530 people injured," Raju said, as quoted by Bar and Bench.
The ASG claimed the planning was deliberate and intended to draw international media attention.
"It was planned in a way that it will synchronise with the visit of Donald Trump so that it gets attention from international media. Intellectuals, when they become terrorists, are more dangerous than ground level terrorists. These intellectuals are the real brains. This has been demonstrated in what happened in Lal Qila. (Referring to recent blast near Red Fort in Delhi)," Raju alleged, as quoted by Bar and Bench.
Raju named Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam, Gulfisha Fatima, Meeran Haider, Shadab Ahmed and Mohd Saleem Khan, saying that even international publications had portrayed them sympathetically.
"New York Times carried a story. Because Trump was coming to India. Whenever the bail matter comes, New York Times carries something. Social media does something. Without understanding that they are anti-nationals under the facade of being intellectuals," the ASG said, as quoted by Bar and Bench.
Raju reiterated that the CAA protests were designed to coincide with Trump’s visit.
"The ultimate intention is regime change. CAA protests were a red-herring, the real purpose was regime change, create economic deprivation and create chaos across the country. The riots were deliberately made to coincide with the visit of US President Donald Trump. These so-called intellectuals are more dangerous than the ground-level terrorists."
According to Raju, the violence mirrored tactics seen in neighbouring countries.
"Something on the scheme of what was happening in Bangladesh and Nepal was being done. It didn’t work. There is a larger conspiracy which engulfs everything," he contended.
‘Doctors and engineers engaging in anti-national activities’
In a parallel submission while opposing the bail of Khalid, Imam and others, Raju told the Supreme Court that educated professionals were increasingly participating in anti-national acts.
Showing the bench videos of Imam delivering speeches, Raju said:
"Nowadays there is a trend that doctors, engineers are not doing their professions but engaging in anti-national activities."
He added:"It's not a simple protest. These are violent protests. They are talking about blockades."
When Justice Kumar asked whether these speeches were part of the chargesheet, the ASG confirmed they were.
Khalid, Imam, Gulfisha Fatima, Meeran Haider and Rehman have been booked under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) and provisions of the erstwhile IPC for allegedly being “masterminds” of the February 2020 riots, which left 53 people dead and over 700 injured.
The violence erupted during widespread protests against the CAA and the National Register of Citizens (NRC).
Earlier this week, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, also for the Delhi Police, had argued that the events were "not something spontaneous but an orchestrated, a pre-planned, and a well-designed attack on the sovereignty of the nation", and that there was an attempt to divide society on communal lines, going beyond mere agitation against the citizenship law.