The Delhi Court, in the context of the larger conspiracy case surrounding the 2020 North-East Delhi riots, denied bail to Tahir Hussain, a former Aam Aadmi Party Councillor.

Additional Sessions Judge Sameer Bajpai dismissed Hussain's bail plea, citing potential alignment with the definition of a terrorist act under the UAPA, asserting that his actions may be construed as constituting such.

The court found sufficient grounds to believe that the accusations against Hussain were prima facie accurate. The Bench further observed that Hussain, purportedly implicated in the conspiracy behind the riots, not only provided financial support to riotous activities but also directly participated in actions that contributed to the outbreak of violence.

“Some other witnesses also gave statements against the applicant to show as to how the applicant was instigating the protesters, gathered the protesters on the roof of his house and was himself involved in throwing petrol bombs, etc. on the public,"  the court added. 

Witnesses testified against Hussain, providing detailed accounts of his involvement in inciting protesters, assembling them on his rooftop, and actively participating in violent acts, including the hurling of petrol bombs. Additionally, the court underscored that Hussain had recently acquired a licensed revolver and a substantial sum of cash, suspected to have been utilized during the rioting.

Furthermore, the court dismissed Hussain's bail application, citing the precedent of granting bail to co-accused Ishrat Jahan, emphasizing that gender was not a pertinent factor in Hussain's case. Taking into account these factors along with the legal limitations outlined in Section 43(D)(5) of the UAPA, the court concluded that Hussain's case did not meet the criteria for bail.

Case Title: Tahir Hussain v State