Delhi riots conspiracy case: HC grants Umar Khalid 3-day interim bail

The Delhi High Court on Friday (May 22) granted interim bail to Umar Khalid for three days, in the UAPA case related to the larger conspiracy for orchestrating the North Delhi riots in 2020.

The interim bail, from June 1 to June 3, was granted to Khalid by the bench of Justice Prathiba M Singh and Justice Madhu, which ordered that he be released between June 01 till June 3. The court also imposed strict conditions on his interim bail.

Bail plea and grounds

According to a Live Law report, Khalid had sought interim bail for 15 days to attend to his uncle’s Chehlum ritual after his death and to take care of his mother, who is scheduled to undergo surgery on June 02.

Also Read: Delhi court rejects Umar Khalid’s interim bail plea, says it's 'not reasonable'

Khalid, who was earlier denied any relief by the trial court, challenged the order in the Delhi High Court. Appearing for Khalid, senior advocate Trideep Pais argued that he had also been granted interim bail for his sister’s wedding and twice thereafter.

However, appearing for the Delhi Police, Additional Solicitor General SV Raju, opposed the bail plea, stating that Khalid's mother has to undergo only a minor surgery and that his sisters can look after her.

HC order and conditions

The court ordered "interim bail is granted for 3 days from 1-3 June, in order to enable appellant to spend time with his mother,” taking an "empathic view" of the matter.

Also Read: SC rejects Umar Khalid’s review plea in Delhi riots conspiracy case

The High Court also directed that Khalid will keep only one mobile phone during the period of interim bail and remain in regular contact with the Investigating Officer. The court said that the detailed terms and conditions would be set out in the final order.

Earlier, while declining relief, the trial court had observed that "just because Umar Khalid and other accused have been granted interim bail earlier and have never flouted conditions, it doesn't mean that on every occasion whenever, accused seeks bail, the same should be granted."

Trial court observations

The court had also held that attending his uncle’s Chehlum ceremony was not indispensable and remarked that if the relationship had been immediate, a plea for release would have been sought at the time of death itself.

Regarding his mother's medical condition, the trial court said other family members, including his sisters and father, could take care of her during the surgery period. FIR 59/2020 invokes provisions of the UAPA, Arms Act, Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act and IPC sections against multiple accused.