Delhi Court rejects Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam bail pleas
Summarized by AI; it may make mistakes. Check important info
Summarized by AI; it may make mistakes. Check important info
A Delhi court on Saturday dismissed the regular bail applications of Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam in the larger conspiracy case linked to the 2020 northeast Delhi riots, holding that it was bound by the Supreme Court's earlier order refusing them bail.
Court says bail pleas not maintainable
Additional Sessions Judge Sameer Bajpai of the Karkardooma Court rejected the bail applications filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) read with Section 43D(5) of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA).
The court observed that the Supreme Court, in its January 5, 2026 order, had already declined bail to both accused and had permitted them to renew their applications only after the examination of the prosecution's protected witnesses or after one year from the order, whichever occurred earlier.
Holding that those conditions had not been met, the trial court ruled that the fresh bail applications were not maintainable and dismissed them.
Defence cites changed circumstances
During the hearing, counsel for Khalid and Imam argued that there had been a change in circumstances since the Supreme Court's January order, pointing to subsequent judgments and interim bail granted to co-accused.
The defence relied on the Supreme Court's ruling in Syed Iftikhar Andrabi vs National Investigation Agency, arguing that it raised questions over the interpretation adopted in the earlier Gulfisha Fatima judgment.
It also referred to the apex court's recent decision granting six months' interim bail to co-accused Tasleem Ahmed and Khalid Saifi, after the legal issue concerning prolonged incarceration under the UAPA was referred to a larger Bench.
Counsel for Umar Khalid further cited a recent Delhi High Court judgment granting bail to Khurram Parvez on the ground of prolonged incarceration, arguing that Khalid has spent more than six years in custody.
The defence sought either regular bail or interim bail on similar grounds.
Prosecution opposes relief
The prosecution opposed the applications, contending that the Supreme Court had already rejected the bail pleas of both accused and had also dismissed Umar Khalid's review petition in April 2026.
It argued that there had been no substantial change in circumstances warranting reconsideration of the issue by the trial court.
Accepting the prosecution's submissions, the court said it could not examine the alleged change in circumstances while the legal issue arising from conflicting Supreme Court judgments was pending before a larger Bench.
Case relates to 2020 Delhi riots
The case pertains to the alleged larger conspiracy behind the communal violence in northeast Delhi in February 2020. Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam are among several accused booked under the UAPA and other penal provisions.
Earlier this year, the Supreme Court refused bail to both accused, holding that the prosecution had presented prima facie material attracting the statutory restrictions on bail under Section 43D(5) of the UAPA. However, it granted bail to five co-accused in the same case.
More recently, the apex court granted six months' interim bail to Tasleem Ahmed and Khalid Saifi, while referring to a larger Bench the question of whether prolonged incarceration and delays in trial can justify bail despite the restrictions under the UAPA.
