The police also stated that Sharjeel Imam had communicated with his brother, Muzammil Imam, showing that the protests were masterminded by him and Asif Mujtaba
Team Clarion
NEW DELHI – The Shaheen Bagh protests in the national capital against the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019 (CAA) and the National Register of Citizens (NRC) were not a peaceful, spontaneous movement, Delhi Police maintain. The protests, which took place from December 2019 to March 2020, were designed to incite large-scale violence, they told the Delhi High Court on Wednesday.
The protests, often referred to as a “nani, dadi protest” (elderly women’s protest), were described by the police as a façade. According to the police, the protests were orchestrated by Sharjeel Imam and Asif Mujtaba.
“The messages of 17.02.2020 on DPSG WhatsApp group unequivocally point at the incitement to violence wherein one Owais Sultan Khan clearly says: ‘Your proposal to incite violence’ followed by another message ‘Itnaa samajh lo sirf ki violence nahin karne denge tumhe aur tumhare doston ko, bhai‘ (Better understand that we won’t let you or your friends incite violence). Thus, the message is loud and clear to reflect that it was not only a proposal to incite violence, rather they were themselves getting into violence along with their friends i.e., the conspirators and their friends,” the police told the court.
Media reports on Thursday said the police claim that the protest sites were not chosen organically but were part of a deliberate strategy. They said that the protest was hyped as a “Dadi Nani protest,” and through their investigation, they claimed to have gathered enough evidence to prove the protest was artificial. The police also stated that Sharjeel Imam had communicated with his brother, Muzammil Imam, showing that the protests were masterminded by him and Mujtaba.
The police further said that the Shaheen Bagh protest lacked local support, which is why people from other areas, including students from Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU), were brought in. According to the police, a WhatsApp chat between Sharjeel Imam and Afreen Fatima on December 19, 2019, revealed that locals opposed the protests, leading Imam to suggest bringing in people from outside.
Regarding the first phase of protests in 2019, the police said the lack of local mobilisation was a key reason for its failure. To address this, a WhatsApp group called JACT was created to spread awareness, but it was restricted from organising any activities. Over time, the group helped establish protest sites across Delhi. The police also claimed that the protest was given an “overly communal tag” due to its strong association with Muslim student groups from JNU, Jamia Millia Islamia, and Aligarh Muslim University. The police presented messages showing that “Sharjeel Imam wanted to maintain a Muslim identity” for the protest and suggested adding secular elements, such as a stall promoting Shashi Tharoor’s book “Why I Am Hindu,” to make the protest appear more inclusive.
“There are clear messages in MSJ where Sharjeel Imam says not to do over secularisation and maintain Muslim identity. In his speeches also, Sharjeel Imam clearly says that get Hindus to participate but on ‘our own terms’,” police said.
Sharjeel Imam was said to have stepped away from the Shaheen Bagh protest site but continued to support it from behind the scenes, such as by sending speakers and writing pamphlets. The police also said there was a lack of coordination between protest sites during the first phase, which they claimed was improved during the second phase.
The police pointed out that during the first phase, strong and effective police action helped prevent the escalation of violence. This action, they said, led to several rioters being named in FIRs and booked for rioting.
Meanwhile, the Delhi Police opposed bail pleas filed by several accused in the 2020 North-East Delhi riots case, including Sharjeel Imam and Umar Khalid, during the high court hearing.
Special Public Prosecutor Amit Prasad argued that the Shaheen Bagh protest lacked local support and was orchestrated by bringing people from other areas. He claimed that the protest sites were created under a planned conspiracy and were presented as organic demonstrations
During the hearing, the court questioned whether organising a protest site could justify charges under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) against individuals. The court also asked the police to prepare a chart indicating the connection between each accused person and their involvement in specific WhatsApp groups.