For the prosecution case in FIR 59, it will do little to show that the Chakka Jaams organised by the accused amounted to offences under the IPC – even rioting. As mentioned earlier, the real prize here is showing that they justify charges under the UAPA, so that they can justify their claims of a vicious overarching conspiracy.
Tamta, Grover and Desai, however, are firmly of the belief that this is a bit of a hard sell. “A Chakka Jaam can be an infraction of the law, but it doesn’t amount to a terrorist or unlawful activity or criminal conspiracy to trigger riots,” Grover says.
Tamta argues that the invocation of the UAPA is less about the actual case itself. “This is to silence people who take up the cause of others, who speak for others, like Yogendra Yadav.”
Desai, who has fought several UAPA cases over the years, including for some of the Bhima Koregaon accused, agrees…