Delhi court rejects bail pleas of Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam in 2020 riots case
A Delhi court has dismissed the bail pleas of activists Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam in the 2020 northeast Delhi riots conspiracy case, rejecting their arguments that prolonged incarceration without trial constituted a vital change in circumstances
New Delhi: A court here on Saturday dismissed the bail pleas of activists Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam in the larger-conspiracy case related to the 2020 northeast Delhi riots.
Additional Sessions Judge Sameer Bajpai denied the relief to both the accused after hearing arguments on bail from both the sides.
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).
The fresh pleas were filed after the apex court, on January 5, denied them bail in the case registered under the UAPA.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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”.
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.
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.
