The Delhi High Court granted bail Friday to five individuals arrested by the Delhi Police last year for allegedly participating in an anti-CAA protest that led to riots in the national capital. In the bail order, the high court observed that “the sole act of protesting should not be employed as a weapon to justify the incarceration of those who are exercising this right.”

The high court released Tabassum, Suvaleen, Furkan, Mohd Arif and Shabad Ahmed on bail in five separate orders. All of them were charged with murder by an unlawful assembly under Section 149 IPC read with Section 302 IPC in connection with the killing of a head constable during the northeast Delhi riots. The observation came in the bail order of Tabassum, a mother of two minors, who was arrested in October 2020.

The court had to decide whether each individual involved in an unlawful assembly should be refused bail regardless of their role. The court ruled that there cannot be “an umbrella of assumption of guilt on behalf of every accused by the court.” Further, it opined that bail jurisprudence aims to strike a balance between an accused’s personal liberty and the preservation of public order. The bench also remarked that allowing an accused to languish in prison during the pendency of the trial goes against constitutional ideals.

Further, the court observed that “the right to protest and express dissent is a right which occupies a fundamental stature in a democratic polity.” Acknowledging that the applicants have been languishing in prison for the last 10-17 months, the court held that the court is under a constitutional obligation to protect the personal liberty of citizens from the excess of state power.

Ultimately, the applicants were released on bail for lack of sufficient evidence to justify their prolonged incarceration. The police claimed that the applicants were among those carrying baseball bats and iron rods, but the court dismissed such assertions as general allegations based on vague evidence.