Court rejects Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam's bail pleas in Delhi riots conspiracy case

A Delhi court on Saturday (July 4) dismissed the bail pleas of activists Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam in the larger conspiracy case pertaining to the 2020 northeast Delhi riots.

The bail pleas of both accused were turned down by Additional Sessions Judge Sameer Bajpai after he heard arguments from both sides.

Referring to the Supreme Court’s January 5 verdict granting relief to co-accused Gulfisha Fatima, Meeran Haider, Shifa Ur Rehman, Mohammad Saleem Khan and Shadab Ahmad while refusing bail to Khalid and Imam, the court stated that the judgment regarding Gulfisha Fatima and Syed Iftikhar Andrabi has already been referred to a larger bench.

Court's reasoning

Elaborating further, it said that unless the issue is resolved, the bail application of Khalid and Imam cannot be considered on any ground.

The judge stated that he has no option but to follow the Supreme Court’s judgment of denying bail to the two accused. It pointed out that the top court has made it clear that only upon the completion of the examination of the protected witnesses or upon expiry of one year from the date of said order, whichever is earlier, the two accused would have the liberty file bail pleas afresh.

Also Read: 'Humanity is a privilege': Umar Khalid on life behind bars for six years

“Thus, following the said order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, this Court cannot entertain the applications and grant bail to the applicants. In fact, the applications are not maintainable, and they are hereby dismissed,” stated the court as quoted by Live Law.

Khalid's arguments

Khalid and Imam moved the bail pleas, contending that their continued incarceration without the commencement of the trial violates their fundamental right to liberty.

Khalid's plea also argued that even as his earlier application was rejected by the Supreme Court, subsequent judicial developments constituted a "change in circumstances". He referred to the court's remarks in May in another case, asserting that "bail is the rule" even under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA).

Also Read: Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam file fresh bail pleas in Delhi riots case

The fresh pleas were filed after the apex court, on January 5, denied them bail in the case registered under the UAPA.

Imam's plea

In his application, Imam said there was no "significant development" in the proceedings even six months after the Supreme Court denied him bail and that he is in custody for nearly six years.

The plea pointed out that charges are yet to be framed in the case despite the prolonged incarceration of the accused.

‘Change in circumstances’

Similalry, Khalid, in his bail plea, cited prolonged incarceration and a delay in the trial, submitting that he has spent nearly six years in custody, without charges being framed.

The plea referred to the apex court's observations in its May-18 order in a terror-related case. While granting bail to the accused, a two-judge bench had criticised a January-5 verdict and emphasised that anti-terror laws should not become a tool for indefinite detention.

Also Read: 'Jail is my life now': Umar Khalid after Supreme Court denies bail

Khalid argued that subsequent judicial developments constituted a "change in circumstances", making the present bail plea maintainable despite the rejection of his earlier application by the apex court.

The application also cited various Supreme Court judgments on prolonged incarceration, including Union of India versus K A Najeeb and Vernon Gonsalves versus State of Maharashtra, to contend that the statutory restrictions on bail under the UAPA cannot override constitutional protections where a trial is unlikely to conclude within a reasonable time.

SC order

On January 5, the Supreme Court refused bail to Khalid and Imam in the larger conspiracy case, while granting the relief to co-accused Gulfisha Fatima, Meeran Haider, Shifa Ur Rehman, Mohammad Saleem Khan and Shadab Ahmad.

Also Read: 'It is unfortunate': Umar Khalid's father on Supreme Court bail denial for son

A bench of Justices Aravind Kumar and N V Anjaria had then observed that there was a prima facie case against Khalid and Imam under the UAPA and held that all accused could not be treated equally in view of the "hierarchy of participation".

2020 riots case

Khalid, Imam and several others were booked under the anti-terror UAPA and provisions of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for allegedly being part of a larger conspiracy behind the February 2020 riots in northeast Delhi.

Also Read: SC refers Umar Khalid bail questions to larger bench in Delhi riots case

The violence had erupted during protests against the Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA) and the proposed National Register of Citizens (NRC), leaving 53 people dead and more than 700 injured.

(With agency inputs)