Delhi High Court Rejects Bail for Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam
In a significant legal setback, the Delhi High Court on Wednesday dismissed the regular bail applications filed by student activists Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam in connection with the larger conspiracy case related to the February 2020 northeast Delhi riots. The case has been registered under the stringent Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), making the legal threshold for securing bail exceptionally high.
A division bench comprising Justice Pratibha M. Singh and Justice Dinesh Bhatt ruled that the court is bound by judicial discipline and cannot alter the conditions and timeline stipulated by the Supreme Court in its earlier orders. Consequently, the third successive bail plea moved by the accused has been turned down, meaning both will remain behind bars for now.
Supreme Court Guidelines and Legal Constraints
During the proceedings, the bench observed that the Supreme Court's January order clearly mandated that the accused could approach the courts for bail either after the deposition of protected witnesses was concluded or upon the completion of one year from the date of the order, whichever is earlier. Since those conditions have not yet been met, the High Court expressed its inability to grant any immediate relief.
Delhi Police vehemently opposed the bail pleas, reiterating that both accused were key conspirators and masterminds behind the communal violence that erupted during protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) and the National Register of Citizens (NRC) in early 2020.
Background of the 2020 Delhi Riots Conspiracy Case
The communal riots that broke out in northeast Delhi in February 2020 resulted in 53 deaths and over 700 injuries, plunging the national capital into a severe crisis. The Special Cell of Delhi Police investigated the violence as a deeply orchestrated conspiracy, arresting several individuals including Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam in late 2020.
While lower courts and previous judicial reviews have consistently denied relief, the ongoing legal battle continues to draw nationwide attention regarding the implementation of UAPA and the rights of undertrials.
