2020 Delhi riots case: Court rejects fresh bail pleas of Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam
A Delhi court on Saturday (July 4, 2026) rejected the fresh bail applications filed by activists Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam, accused in larger conspiracy
A Delhi court on Saturday (July 4, 2026) rejected the fresh bail applications filed by activists Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam, accused in larger conspiracy case related to 2020 North East Delhi riots. Also read | Hierarchy of roles: On no bail for Umar Khalid Additional Sessions Judge Sameer Bajpai denied the relief to both the accused after hearing arguments on bail from both the sides. They filed for bail after a Supreme Court bench raised objections to a coordinating bench’s order denying them bail. Khalid and Mr. Imam were booked under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) for being among the “masterminds” of the February 2020 Delhi riots that had left 53 people dead and more than 700 injured.
Khalid and Mr. Imam moved for bail, contending that their continued incarceration without the commencement of the trial violates their fundamental right to liberty. Khalid’s plea also argued that even as the Supreme Court rejected his earlier application, subsequent judicial developments constituted a “change in circumstances”. He referred to the court’s remarks in May in another case, asserting that “bail is the rule” even under the UAPA. In his application, Mr. Imam said there has been no “significant development” in the proceedings even six months after the Supreme Court denied him bail, and that he has been in custody for nearly six years.
The plea pointed out that charges are yet to be framed in the case despite the prolonged incarceration of the accused. Similarly, Mr. Khalid, in his bail plea, cited prolonged incarceration and a delay in the trial, submitting that he has spent nearly six years in custody, without charges being framed. The plea referred to the apex court’s observations in its May 18 order in a terror-related case. While granting bail to the accused, a two-judge bench criticised a January 5 verdict and emphasised that anti-terror laws should not be used as a tool for indefinite detention. The Delhi Police, represented by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta and Additional Solicitor-General S.V. Raju, had earlier characterised Mr. Khalid and Mr. Imam as the “intellectual architects” of the alleged conspiracy.
The prosecution had argued that the scale of the violence, the degree of preparation involved, and the intent underlying it left “no doubt” that the conspiracy extended far beyond civil demonstrations against the Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA), 2019. However, the accused had maintained that they were exercising their constitutional right to protest and had no role in inciting violence. (With PTI inputs)
The BriefWire