Supreme Court to Delhi Police: Provide Security Details for Tahir Hussain

New Delhi: The Supreme Court of India recently directed the Delhi Police to provide detailed information regarding the security arrangements required if Tahir Hussain, a key figure accused in the 2020 Delhi riots, is granted parole for campaigning in the upcoming Delhi Assembly elections.

This directive came after the All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen (AIMIM) party, led by Asaduddin Owaisi, announced Hussain as their candidate for the Mustafabad constituency.

Court Proceedings and Security Arrangements

The matter was heard by a bench led by Justice Vikram Nath, which included Justices Sanjay Karol and Sandeep Mehta.

The bench addressed a plea from Hussain, a former Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) councilor, requesting interim bail for the purpose of election campaigning ahead of the elections.

The court emphasized that the Delhi Police should provide an estimate of the security personnel needed, along with the estimated expenses, if Hussain is allowed to campaign under custody parole.

The Supreme Court also suggested that if parole is granted, Hussain might be required to bear the expenses associated with his security. This indicates that the court is considering the logistical and financial implications of such a decision.

The Petition for Parole

Tahir Hussain’s senior advocate, Siddharth Agarwal, made it clear that Hussain’s request was limited to seeking custody parole for a period of 3-4 days, given the short remaining window for campaigning.

Agarwal stated that Hussain was willing to stay in a hotel room instead of his residence during this time and would provide the necessary details for tracking his whereabouts.

On the other hand, Additional Solicitor General (ASG) S.V. Raju, representing the Delhi Police, raised concerns about granting parole, claiming that it could set a negative precedent, encouraging other prisoners to file nominations and seek parole for electoral purposes.

He argued that such a move could lead to a flood of similar requests, potentially undermining the integrity of the electoral process.

Security Costs and Implications

The bench’s request for details of the security measures underscores the potential impact of granting parole on public safety and law enforcement resources.

Also Read | Kejriwal Urges PM Modi to Waive Loans for Farmers and Middle Class, Not the Rich

The court asked the Delhi Police to estimate how many personnel would be required to ensure Hussain’s safety and maintain order during his parole period. The idea of Hussain bearing the costs of his security was also discussed, suggesting that the court is considering all facets of the decision, including financial responsibility.

The Legal Background

Tahir Hussain’s involvement in the 2020 Delhi riots has drawn significant legal attention. Hussain is accused of being a key instigator in the riots, which led to widespread violence and loss of life in the capital. He has been in custody for over four years, facing serious charges related to the riots.

Last week, a two-judge bench of the Supreme Court delivered a split verdict on Hussain’s petition for interim bail. While Justice Pankaj Mithal rejected his plea, Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah was inclined to grant him bail, considering his lengthy incarceration.

The matter was then referred to the Chief Justice of India for further deliberation, and the Supreme Court sought the Delhi Police’s response, with the observation that Hussain’s extended time in custody might make him eligible for regular bail.

Justice Amanullah pointed out that if the court finds merit in granting regular bail, it should not ignore Hussain’s long stay in jail.

The case has garnered considerable attention, with the Supreme Court expressing concerns about the fairness and justification of denying bail after such a long period of detention.

Earlier Developments and Parole Conditions

In a previous ruling, the Delhi High Court had denied Hussain’s plea for interim bail but allowed him parole to file his nomination papers for the Assembly elections.

During this period of custody parole, Hussain was restricted from using phones or the internet, meeting anyone except for officials involved in the nomination process, and addressing the media.

These conditions were set to ensure that his parole would not interfere with the election process or be used to influence public opinion.

Hussain’s legal team, led by senior advocate Rebecca John, had argued that the former councilor’s request for interim bail was based on the unique circumstances of his prolonged incarceration.

However, Additional Solicitor General Chetan Sharma, representing the Delhi Police, strongly opposed the plea, citing the severity of the allegations against Hussain and the potential risk of witness tampering if he were granted bail.