Atheist Nation

Main Menu

  • Home
  • Antireligion
  • Militant atheism
  • State religions
  • Atheists
  • Religion money

Atheist Nation

Header Banner

Atheist Nation

  • Home
  • Antireligion
  • Militant atheism
  • State religions
  • Atheists
  • Religion money
Atheists
Home›Atheists›Prosecution questions Omar Khalid’s secularism while opposing bail request

Prosecution questions Omar Khalid’s secularism while opposing bail request

By Rebecca Vega
January 25, 2022
0
0

New Delhi: The prosecution opposing the bail application of former Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) student Umar Khalid in the North East Delhi riots case on Monday questioned its public perception of atheist and secularist, seeking to know if this is the case, “then why he joined a particular community group at JNU”.

Special Prosecutor Amit Prasad said, “Why did he join a Muslim group at JNU? You present yourself as something else for the public to know,” he said.

Additional Sessions Judge Amitabh Rawat of the Karkardooma Court was hearing the prosecution’s arguments on Khalid’s bail application.

Furthermore, Prasad argued that the 25 protest sites were close to local mosques but were deliberately given “secular names”, pointing to the Shreeram settlement protest site, which is the Noorani Masjid protest. Sadar Bazar protest site is originally Shahi Idgaah. The Shastri Park protest site was Wahid Jama Masjid. The Gandhi Park protest site was actually Jamila Masjid.

He also argued that protest site organizers wanted to create groundwork for 24/7 protest sit-ins.

He also claimed there were hidden elements including PFI, Jamat-e-Hind and Student Islamic Organization of India during the protests.

The arguments will continue at the next hearing on January 28 as it did not end on Monday.

At Khalid’s previous bail application hearing on January 11, responding to his lawyer’s bail application submissions, SPP said, “It is very unfortunate that the application was returned by web series such as “Family Man” and the movie “Trial of Chicago 7”. ‘, and did not make arguments based on the law”.

He told the court that out of 17 points from Khalid’s lawyer, the first argument was that he wanted his plea to be decided with reference to the web series.

He was referring to a case in which, it was alleged that on February 25, 2020, a mob of rioters, numbering around 150 to 200, attacked the home of a 73-year-old Muslim woman while her family was n was not present at home and looted all household items.

The first convict in the case – Dinesh Yadav from Bhagirathi Vihar at Gokulpuri in Delhi was arrested on June 8, 2020.

Khalid was convicted of offenses under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act in connection with the North East Delhi riots that broke out in 2020.

Related posts:

  1. DeSantis signs bill demanding daily minute’s silence at school
  2. The “fantastic life” of the writer Elizabeth Knox
  3. More residents have no religious affiliation compared to 10 years ago, Singapore News & Top Stories
  4. PM Orbán: “The war for the spirit and the future of Europe is waged here and now”

Categories

  • Antireligion
  • Atheists
  • Militant atheism
  • Religion money
  • State religions

Recent Posts

  • Why Sabaton chose to avoid making political statements
  • A Muslim “bridge builder” has started interfaith work in his basement. Now it has programs on hundreds of campuses. – Chicago Tribune
  • Explainer: Religious freedom in Ukraine in the 20th and 21st centuries | Baptist life
  • Was this drama series canceled by CBS?
  • MTG continues to run a troubling far-right Facebook group – Peach Pundit
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms and Conditions