The TLDR: The Delhi police expanded its list of wanted suspects in the toolkit case to include two other activists—amid growing outrage over Disha Ravi’s arrest. As legal experts raised new questions about its legality, the police set out its theory of the crime—which now involves a Zoom meeting with Canada-based Poetic Justice Foundation and a WhatsApp chat with Greta Thunberg. 

Note: Read our Monday explainer for details on Ravi, and the toolkit in question. 

A theory of conspiracy

New suspects: The police have obtained non-bailable warrants against two other activists: Nikita Jacob and Shantanu Muluk. Jacob is a Mumbai-based High Court lawyer, while Muluk is an engineer from Beed. They are both members of a UK-based climate change group called Extinction Rebellion—which is best known for staging spectacular and disruptive protests (A good guide here).

While the police claims that Jacob and Muluk are “absconding,” both have filed court petitions seeking ‘transit pre-bail’—which will give them the opportunity to present their case before a Delhi court before they are arrested.

The toolkit: The police essentially allege that these three were among five editors of the Google doc that contained the farmer protest toolkit (the remaining two have not been named). And they ‘conspired’ to create it:

“The email account created by Shantanu is the admin account or owner of the Google document. Nikita and Disha are the editors of the toolkit. Disha further shared the document with Greta on Telegram. She also created a WhatsApp group to collaborate with other editors, which she later deleted.”

Also this: the toolkit was created in association with the Canada-based Poetic Justice Foundation—whose co-founder Mo Dhaliwal has made statements in support of Khalistan (explained yesterday):

“A woman named Puneet, based in Canada, connected these people to the pro-Khalistan Poetic Justice Foundation and through them created toolkit Google documents titled ‘Global Farmer Strike’ and ‘Global Day of Action, 26 January’.”

According to the police, the document contained hyperlinks to other sites, among them askindiawhy.com—which is listed on PJF’s Twitter handle, and allegedly includes “lot of pro-Khalistani content.” (The website can no longer be reached). 

The Zoom meeting: Through this person Puneet (last name unknown), Jacob and Shantanu attended a meeting with PJF on January 11: “There were around 60-70 people in this meeting… In this meeting, they discussed the modalities of Republic Day preparations. Following this meeting, a toolkit was made.”

The Thunberg convo: The police claim to have accessed a WhatsApp conversation between Disha Ravi and Greta Thunberg. After Thunberg tweeted out the first (and now suspect) toolkit on February 3, Ravi asked her to delete it: 

“Okay can you not tweet the toolkit at all. Can you just not say anything at all for a while. I am gonna talk to lawyers. I am sorry but our names are on it and we can literally get UAPA against us.”

She then sent Thunberg a revised version of the toolkit.

FYI: UAPA refers to Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act which is a highly stringent anti-terrorism law. It was previously slapped onto a Delhi police notice issued to Ravi’s organisation Fridays for Future India in July 2020—when they launched an email campaign targeting the Environmental Ministry (explained yesterday).

An added twist: The Delhi police also flagged US rights activist Pieter Friedrich:

“‘In the toolkit, there’s a section of ‘who is to be followed’. There are names of established media houses, reputed fact checkers, some NGOs and among those we found an incongruous name. That is Pieter Friedrich.’

 

According to [DCP Manishi] Chandra, Friedrich has been ‘on the radar of security establishments since 2006’. Chandra said the activist was allegedly ‘noticed in the company of Bhajan Singh Bhinder alias Iqbal Chaudhary’, who is ‘a leading proponent of the K2 (Kashmir and Khalistan) desk’ of Pakistan’s ISI.”

Friedrich—who is closely associated with Bhinder, and has co-authored books with him—told Indian Express that the idea of being a Khalistan supporter is “laughable.” But according to The Week, Bhinder has indeed been on the intelligence radar since 1985. It also notes that the Delhi police flagged Friedrich at the same time that a lesser known Open Source Intelligence group called Disinfo Lab (not to be confused with the better known EU DisinfoLab) put out a detailed report on him.

Point to note: The report has no view on Disha Ravi or the other activists. 

A number of legal irregularities

Legal experts have raised a number of objections to the circumstances surrounding Ravi’s arrest. They include the following:

One: She was presented in court without her lawyer—who was still in Bangalore. To which the Delhi police insists she was provided with legal aid, and a lawyer represented her in court—but did not present any arguments. However, Article 22 of the Constitution says states: 

“No person who is arrested shall be detained in custody without being informed, as soon as may be, of the grounds for such arrest nor shall he be denied the right to consult, and to be defended by, a legal practitioner of his choice.”

Two: There are specific rules when police from one state makes an arrest in another:

“Before visiting the other state, the Police Officer must endeavour to establish contact with the local Police Station in whose jurisdiction he is to conduct the investigation. He must carry with him the translated copies of the Complaint/FIR and other documents in the language of the State which he intends to visit.”

Delhi police claims that Ravi was arrested in the presence of “her mother, a female officer and SHO of local police station.” However, Indian Express reports that there was no local policeman present when the Delhi police—who arrived in a car and dressed in mufti—arrested Ravi at her home. The Bangalore police has been changing its story on its involvement (see here and here). 

Three: Irrespective of the above, a memorandum submitted by 70 activists to the Bangalore police points out that she was not allowed to contact her lawyer, or appear before a local magistrate—both of which again are grave violations of her rights under Article 22.

Where’s the evidence?

Quite apart from the arrest, the key components of the conspiracy case appear to be weak. 

One: Here’s a former Supreme Court judge offering his assessment of the toolkit:

Two: as for the Zoom call with PJF (whatever its agenda), The Telegraph notes: 

“In any case, even membership of a banned organisation is not an offence in India unless accompanied by violence or incitement to a crime, according to a Supreme Court ruling in 2011. The Centre had sought a review of this ruling in 2016.”

Three: As we noted yesterday, police attention has been focused on “digital strikes”—which is just another word for a coordinated social media campaign. For example: the kind rolled out to target Ravi on Twitter. Adding to the irony: The Maharashtra government reaffirmed its plan to investigate the BJP IT cell for its “digital strike” against the farmer protests—by roping in celebrities.

The bottomline: The farmer unions have thrown their full support behind the activists—asserting common cause with their environmental concerns. Their leaders also said this: “We are not worried about the FIRs and notices [against the farmers] because that is a part of any agitation of this scale and we were prepared for it. That won’t deter our participation.”

Reading list

• Indian Express has the most details on the new developments.
• Times of India has more on Jacob’s petition.
• The Telegraph reports on the response of farmer unions to the arrests. 
• Also in The Telegraph: The chilling effect on young climate activists.
• The News Minute looks at the legal issues with Ravi’s arrest. 
• Also read: The memorandum submitted by activists to the Bangalore police.
• The Wire takes aim at BJP’s own toolkit to target Ravi.
• Good related read: Article 14 on the campaign to muzzle Indian media.
• BBC News has an excellent profile of Ravi.