The court said an accused can move a bail application if his/her counsel was of the opinion that there was no need of further custody and then the accused can be heard by it.
Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Dinesh Kumar said at the time of fresh arrest, the accused and his/her counsel can oppose the prayer of the investigating officer for sending the accused to judicial custody or granting police custody remand.
It extended the judicial custody of Khalid till December 16 saying there were sufficient grounds for the extension.
It dismissed his counsel’s request seeking permission to oppose the remand application as no bail application has been moved before the court.
The court said there was no scope of hearing the counsel of the accused and giving him/her an opportunity to oppose the remand application whenever the remand was to be extended.
“No doubt remand of an accused should not be extended mechanically. However, there is no scope of hearing the counsel of the accused and giving him/her opportunity to oppose the remand application whenever the remand is to be extended.
“At the time of fresh arrest, the accused and his/her counsel can oppose the prayer of the IO (investigating officer) for sending the accused to judicial custody or granting police custody remand of the accused. However, an accused can move a bail application if the accused or his counsel is of the opinion that there is no need of the custody of the accused and therefore, there is no requirement of extension of judicial custody remand,” it said in its order.
Khalid was arrested on October 1 in the case related to rioting in Khajuri Khas area. He was also arrested in September in a separate case related to larger conspiracy in the riots.
Communal violence had broken out in northeast Delhi on February 24 after clashes between citizenship law supporters and protesters spiralled out of control leaving at least 53 people dead and around 200 injured.