A Delhi court has framed charges against Sharjeel Imam, labeling him the key orchestrator behind the 2019 Jamia riots that erupted during protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA). The court described his speeches as “venomous” and designed to incite unrest, rejecting his claims of advocating peaceful demonstrations.
According to the court, Imam’s rhetoric deliberately sowed division and mobilized protestors for a coordinated disruption through ‘chakka jaam’ (road blockades). His words, the court noted, led to a violent chain of events, including arson, property damage, and attacks on law enforcement.
The court also charged three others—Ashu Khan, Chandan Kumar, and Aasif Iqbal Tanha—citing mobile location data and media statements as indicators of their role in leading the unrest. Rejecting Imam’s defense that his speeches did not call for violence, the court emphasized that mass-scale road blockades in a city like Delhi were inherently disruptive and could endanger lives, particularly in medical emergencies.
The December 15, 2019, violence saw buses and private vehicles set ablaze, public property damaged, and intense clashes with police. The court underscored that the riot was not spontaneous but the outcome of a planned effort led by “self-proclaimed leaders” who steered the protests toward chaos.
The prosecution pointed to Imam’s speeches at Aligarh Muslim University and Jamia University days before the riots, arguing that he incited fear by falsely claiming Muslims were being held in detention camps. The court ruled that his words were designed not just to spark political discourse but to trigger widespread agitation.
Imam’s legal team attempted to invoke double jeopardy, arguing that he was already facing sedition and related charges in a separate case. However, the court dismissed this, stating that his role in the Jamia riots warranted distinct charges.
With the latest ruling, Imam now faces trial under multiple sections of the Indian Penal Code, including conspiracy, unlawful assembly, rioting, and incitement to violence. Charges under sedition remain on hold, pending a Supreme Court decision on the provision’s validity. Meanwhile, 15 other accused individuals were discharged due to insufficient evidence linking them to the violence.
As the trial moves forward, the court’s ruling cements Imam’s position as a central figure in the events that transformed the anti-CAA protests into one of the most controversial flashpoints in recent years.
