BREAKING | DELHI RIOTS: HIGH COURT REJECTS BAIL PLEAS OF UMAR KHALID, SHARJEEL IMAM AND SEVEN OTHERS IN UAPA CASE:

The Delhi High Court has dismissed the bail applications of Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam, and seven other accused in connection with the alleged “larger conspiracy” case linked to the 2020 Delhi riots. The verdict was pronounced by a division bench comprising Justice Naveen Chawla and Justice Shalinder Kaur, affirming earlier orders of the trial court that had denied bail to the accused.

The nine accused whose bail pleas were rejected include Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam, Athar Khan, Khalid Saifi, Mohd. Saleem Khan, Shifa-ur-Rehman, Meeran Haider, Gulfisha Fatima, and Shadab Ahmed. These individuals were arrested between January and September 2020. According to the record, Sharjeel Imam was arrested on January 28, 2020, Umar Khalid on September 13, 2020, Athar Khan on June 29, 2020, Khalid Saifi on February 26, 2020, Mohd. Saleem Khan on June 24, 2020, Shifa-ur-Rehman on April 26, 2020, Meeran Haider on April 1, 2020, Gulfisha Fatima on April 4, 2020, and Shadab Ahmed on June 11, 2020.

All nine had challenged trial court orders rejecting their bail pleas in the case registered under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (UAPA) and various provisions of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

During the hearings, several defense arguments were advanced. Senior Advocate Trideep Pais, representing Umar Khalid, contended that Khalid’s mere presence in WhatsApp groups without posting any messages could not constitute a criminal act. He further argued that no incriminating recovery, financial or otherwise, had been made from Khalid. He also disputed the prosecution’s claim about a “secret” meeting on the night of February 23–24, 2020, asserting that it was not clandestine in nature.

Senior Advocate Rebecca John, appearing for accused Khalid Saifi, argued that innocuous messages exchanged on WhatsApp had been exaggerated by the prosecution to construct a narrative of conspiracy. She urged that such communications could not justify prosecution under the UAPA nor form the basis for denial of bail. She also sought parity with three co-accused who had been granted bail earlier in June 2021.

Sharjeel Imam, through his counsel Advocate Talib Mustafa, maintained that he had no connection with the other co-accused and was not part of any conspiracy or related meetings. His counsel highlighted that the prosecution’s reliance on his alleged role extended only until January 23, 2020, primarily based on a speech delivered by him in Bihar, well before the riots occurred in late February 2020.

On the other hand, Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta, representing the Delhi Police, opposed the bail pleas. He submitted that the accused had engaged in activities intended to harm national interests and argued that they should remain in custody until acquittal or conviction. According to the prosecution, the accused had orchestrated events to coincide with particular dates to maximize violence and arson, thereby intending to tarnish India’s reputation internationally. Special Public Prosecutor Amit Prasad also represented the Delhi Police in the matter.

The case stems from FIR 59 of 2020, registered by the Delhi Police’s Special Cell under multiple provisions of the IPC and UAPA. The list of accused in the broader conspiracy includes Tahir Hussain, Umar Khalid, Khalid Saifi, Ishrat Jahan, Meeran Haider, Gulfisha Fatima, Shifa-ur-Rehman, Asif Iqbal Tanha, Shadab Ahmed, Tasleem Ahmed, Saleem Malik, Mohd. Saleem Khan, Athar Khan, Safoora Zargar, Sharjeel Imam, Faizan Khan, and Natasha Narwal.

By rejecting the bail pleas of the nine accused, the High Court has reaffirmed the trial court’s stance that the charges and allegations in the case remain serious and continue to warrant custody under the provisions of UAPA.