Sharjeel Imam and Umar Khalid seek bail in 2020 Delhi riots case

Accused Sharjeel Imam and Umar Khalid have approached the Supreme Court in connection with the alleged large-scale conspiracy case related to the 2020 Delhi riots. Both have challenged the Delhi High Court's order dated 30 September, which refused to grant them bail. Proceedings in this case are being conducted under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, i.e., UAPA.

In their applications filed in the Supreme Court, both accused argued that they have been in jail for more than six years, yet the trial of the case has not commenced. They stated that continuing their incarceration for such a long period is a violation of the guarantee of personal liberty provided under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. They also pointed out that the one-year ban imposed by the Supreme Court on filing new bail applications is nearing completion.

Looking at the background of this case, a bench of Justice Arvind Kumar and Justice N. V. Anjaria had refused bail to Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam on 5 January. The court described them as "ideological drivers" of the alleged conspiracy. The bench observed that the position of both these accused is "qualitatively different" from other accused. According to the court, the material on record prima facie suggests that their role in the planning and direction of the alleged conspiracy was central and foundational.

However, in the same order, the Supreme Court had granted bail to five other co-accused—Gulfisha Fatima, Meeran Haider, Shifa ur Rehman, Mohammad Salim Khan, and Shadab Ahmed—subject to strict conditions. The court provided a relief for Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam that they could re-apply for bail either after the examination of protected witnesses is completed or after one year from the court's order, whichever is earlier.

In his application, Sharjeel Imam detailed that the chargesheet in this case was filed on 25 September 2020. The prosecution has provided a list of more than 900 witnesses, including 47 protected witnesses. Imam argued that despite being in jail as undertrials for six years and nine months, the prosecution has not been able to examine even a single witness so far. He expressed apprehension that due to the lack of progress in the trial, there is no possibility of the examination of protected witnesses being completed before the one-year period stipulated by the Supreme Court expires.

Umar Khalid also made a similar argument that the examination of protected witnesses is still pending and the one-year time limit set by the Supreme Court is nearing completion. Khalid stated that long-term incarceration is a violation of his fundamental rights. Umar Khalid filed his application through Advocate N. Sai Vinod, and Sharjeel Imam through Advocate Fauzia Shakeel.

Earlier, on 30 September, a division bench of Justice Pratibha M. Singh and Justice Dinesh Bhatt of the Delhi High Court dismissed their new bail applications. The High Court stated that due to judicial discipline, it could not modify the Supreme Court's order of 5 January. The High Court observed that the relief granted by the Supreme Court for bail was explicitly conditional—either the examination of protected witnesses must be completed or the one-year period must expire. The High Court does not have the authority to alter these conditions.

Furthermore, the High Court also rejected their demand for parity with co-accused Taslim Ahmed and Khalid Saifi, who were granted interim bail by the Supreme Court. The court noted that the allegations against them are materially different. It is noteworthy that Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam had approached the High Court against the trial court's order of 4 July, in which their third bail application was rejected. The trial court had said it had no option but to comply with the Supreme Court's order.

Both applicants have informed the Supreme Court that the case is currently at the stage of arguments on charge. They claimed that arguments on framing charges were completed on 13 July, but the trial has not progressed because the trial judge is awaiting the Supreme Court's verdict on an application regarding the inspection of unmentioned documents by a co-accused. This verdict was reserved on 1 September. The applicants argued that there is no possibility of the examination of protected witnesses starting or being completed before 5 January 2027, and in such a situation, their continuous detention is no longer procedural but has become punitive due to undue delay.

The applicants pointed towards another important matter. On 18 May, another bench of the Supreme Court (Justice B.V. Nagarathna and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan) in a different case under UAPA observed that delay in trial could be a ground to grant bail to an accused under UAPA. This verdict was contrary to the 5 January decision. Taking this contradiction into account, Justice Arvind Kumar's bench had referred the matter to a larger bench. During this process, on 22 May, co-accused Abdul Khalid Saifi and Taslim Ahmed were granted interim bail for six months.

The Delhi Police and the prosecution have opposed their bail applications. The police stated that the conditions stipulated by the Supreme Court prevent their release at this stage. The prosecution also rejected the claim of parity with Taslim Ahmed and Khalid Saifi.

This entire case is linked to the riots that took place in North-East Delhi in February 2020, involving allegations of a large-scale conspiracy. This violence broke out during protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), 2019, and the National Register of Citizens (NRC). 53 people died in these riots and more than 700 people were injured. The Special Cell of the Delhi Police is investigating this case. Sharjeel Imam was arrested on 25 August 2020 and Umar Khalid was arrested on 13 September 2020. A trial is ongoing against a total of 18 accused in this case.

Both Sharjeel Imam and Umar Khalid are student activists and scholars who are accused of playing a key role in the alleged conspiracy of the 2020 Delhi riots.