Omar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam not given relief by Supreme Court, bail granted to remaining five accused

New Delhi: (Agency) The Supreme Court on Monday rejected the bail pleas of student activists Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam in the 2020 Delhi riots conspiracy case. The verdict was delivered by a bench comprising Justices Aravind Kumar and NV Ramana. The Supreme Court had reserved its verdict on December 10 after hearing arguments from the accused and the Delhi Police. The Supreme Court also granted bail to other co-accused in the case, Gulfisha Fatima, Meeran Haider, Shafa-ur-Rahman, Mohammad Salim Khan, and Shadab Ahmed, terming their continuous detention as unnecessary. All these accused have been in jail for over five years for their alleged role in the 2020 Delhi riots.

Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam, apart from other co-accused, will be released from jail on bail. They had challenged the Delhi High Court's order of September 2023, which denied them bail in a case registered under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA). The case pertains to the alleged "larger conspiracy" behind the 2020 riots, which broke out during protests against the Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA) and the proposed National Register of Citizens (NRC), leaving 53 people dead and over 700 injured.

The Delhi Police had opposed the bail pleas, citing provisions of the UAPA. Sharjeel Imam has been in jail since January 28, 2020, while Umar Khalid has been in jail since September 13, 2020. Imam and Khalid had challenged the September 2023 order of the Delhi High Court, which denied them bail, citing the gravity of the charges and the seriousness of the alleged conspiracy.

The bench of Justices Aravind Kumar and NV Ramana observed that the charges against the two activists were of a serious nature, and they were in a different position compared to the other co-accused. However, the court granted bail to five other co-accused - Gulfisha Fatima, Meeran Haider, Shafa-ur-Rahman, Mohammad Salim Khan, and Shadab Ahmed - citing their alleged role in the violence as different.

The verdict came on separate special leave petitions filed by the accused, challenging the September 2 order of the Delhi High Court, which denied them bail. The bench said that since the order was lengthy, it would only read out a few excerpts.

The court emphasized that an early hearing was necessary in the case. The defense had alleged that the appeal was responsible for the delay in the investigation and hearing. The court's order stated that the delay could be due to a full judicial inquiry.

Article 21 of the Constitution holds a central position, and pre-trial detention cannot be considered a punishment. Deprivation of liberty should not be arbitrary. The Supreme Court also said that Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam were in a different position compared to the other co-accused, and there was a conscious avoidance of a collective or coordinated perspective.

The court said it was satisfied that the material on record prima facie established the initial charges against the appellants, Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam. The legal threshold applied to these appellants, and it was not appropriate to grant them bail at this stage of the proceedings.

The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) on Monday criticized the Congress over the Supreme Court's rejection of the bail pleas of Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam.

Addressing a press conference at the party headquarters, BJP spokesperson Shehzad Poonawalla said that after the Supreme Court's verdict, there was an atmosphere of grief among the "tukde-tukde gang" in the country.

Mr. Poonawalla said that the Supreme Court had delivered a verdict that had caused immense grief and pain to the "tukde-tukde gang". He said that there were numerous letters and expressions of solidarity for Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam, not just from the Congress and its ecosystem but also from abroad. Today, the Supreme Court had denied them any relief by rejecting their bail pleas.

Mr. Poonawalla said that the Supreme Court had also observed that the nature of the crime they had committed, the allegations of terrorism and burning down Delhi, had prima facie been proved. This was not an ordinary crime but a very serious one that aimed to divide the country. He said that the way the two accused had made these moves, it was clear that the riots in Delhi were fully organized and systematic.

He said it was not a coincidence but a well-planned and anti-Hindu conspiracy, considering the vote bank factor.