Opposing the bail plea of activist Umar Khalid in the 2020 North East Delhi violence case, the prosecution on Monday alleged that the riots were a “conspiracy of silence”, Live Law reported.

Arguing before additional sessions judge Amitabh Rawat, special public prosecutor Amit Prasad said that the violence was incited to “paralyse the system”.

Communal violence had broken out between the supporters of the Citizenship Amendment Act and those opposing the law in North East Delhi between February 23 and February 26, 2020. The violence claimed 53 lives and hundreds were injured. The majority of those killed were Muslims.

Khalid has been charged under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act along with two students of the city’s Jamia Millia Islamia University, Meeran Haider and Safoora Zargar in connection with the Delhi violence case.

Prasad on Monday referred to various first information reports registered in December 2019 during protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act and claimed that the “first phase of riots” was planned. “People involved in both phases were common,” he was quoted as saying to the court.

According to Prasad, the “first phase” of the riots failed because of insufficient mobilisation, according to Live Law. He told the court that members of various groups coordinated and planned the protests.

Prasad also said that Bharatiya Janata Party leader Kapil Mishra, who many rioters have alleged incited the violence, had not even surfaced on February 17, when there was an alleged proposal to incite the violence.

“Where was Kapil Mishra then?” said Prasad. “He has not even surfaced anywhere and your proposal to incite violence has surfaced.”

Prasad claimed that on February 23, “violence had to be done” and a name and narrative was needed for that.

On February 23, 2020, Mishra amassed a crowd and gave an ultimatum to the police to clear the roads in Delhi’s Jafrabad area that were packed by the anti-Citizenship Amendment Act protestors.

In the presence of a senior police officer, he demanded that the police evict the protestors and threatened violence in case they failed to do so within three days.

During the last hearing on January 24, the prosecution claimed that all 25 sites where protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act took place in Delhi were chosen because they were closer to mosques and were “purposefully given secular names”.

The matter will be heard next on February 2.