Mumbai court rejects student-activist's bail plea in sedition case

Urvashi Chudawala

The anticipatory bail application (ABA) of Urvashi Chudawala has been rejected by the Mumbai sessions court. The court did not give any interim relief to Chudawala to appeal in the high court. During the hearing on Wednesday, the court observed that prima facie the case of IPC 124 (sedition) was made out against her and hence anticipatory bail could not be given.

The court also refused to provide interim relief for appeal saying that the application was decided on merit.

During the hearing, Chudawala's lawyer Vijay Hiremath told the court that the police had picked just one line and was calling it sedition while there were several other slogans in the video.

"Saying 'Sharjeel, tere sapno ko hum manzil tak pahunchayenge' doesn't fall in the category of sedition as there are several SC judgments that have clarified the definition of sedition. Against Sharjeel, too, there are only allegations and those are to be proved before a court of law," Hiremath said.

He told the court that he believed whatever Chudawala did was not sedition as it did not invoke violence or wasn't against the government.

Hiremath said her career could be ruined over just two seconds in the video. Chudawala is an MA second-year student and her exams are scheduled in March. Chudawala's lawyer also said her passport would have to be surrendered if the court gave her ABA.

"Urvashi is only 22 years old, and if arrested over a small mistake, her entire career will be destroyed," Hiremath said.

Public Prosecutor Jaysingh Desai told the court, "Without ascertaining the facts of the case they are making a claim that they should be granted anticipatory bail." Desai said, "The FIR copy says Urvashi not only shouted slogans once, but has also uploaded a post on social media in which it was written that Sharjeel should be released unconditionally." The police produced screenshots of her social media posts where she supported Sharjeel.

Desai read the transscript of what Sharjeel had said in his video. Desai said in it there was talk of breaking Assam from India.

After hearing arguments on both sides, the court said it was not about freedom of speech, it was about the content of the speech. Urvashi was supporting a person who is already in jail for speaking about dividing this country and the present accused was speaking about fulfilling his dream of dividing India.

Prosecution said that investigation is going on in this case, further investigation is needed.

Catch up on all the latest Crime, National, International and Hatke news here. Also download the new mid-day Android and iOS apps to get latest updates