Delhi riots: HC to hear bail pleas by Umar, Sharjeel on Sept 30
The Delhi High Court on Monday listed for hearing on September 30 bail pleas by activists Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam in a case under the anti-terror law UAPA over the “larger conspiracy” behind the February 2020 riots in north-east Delhi.
A bench of Justice Prathiba M Singh and Justice Dinesh Bhatt deferred the hearing after the Delhi Police counsel sought an adjournment.
Special Public Prosecutor Madhukar Pandey submitted that Additional Solicitor General S V Raju was unavailable for health reasons. “Matter is adjourned to September 30,” the bench said.
Khalid and Imam have been booked under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) on allegations of being among the masterminds of the February 2020 riots that left 53 people dead and more than 700 injured.
Violence erupted during protests against the Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA), 2019, and the National Register of Citizens (NRC).
Activist Khalid Saifi and former AAP councillor Tahir Hussain, among others, were also booked for alleged involvement in the larger conspiracy case, being investigated by Delhi Police’s Special Cell.
The court on Monday also deferred hearing of the bail plea by Tahir Hussain in the case, and listed it in November.
Khalid and Imam had moved the high court earlier this year after their bail applications were dismissed by the trial court for the third time on July 4.
Imam was arrested in the case on August 25, 2020. Khalid was arrested on September 13, 2020.
The Delhi Police has opposed the pleas in the high court, asserting that the two are “masterminds” of the riots.
Arguing that they cannot seek bail on parity with other co-accused in the case, police have stated that the Supreme Court has earlier categorised them as being “command authority” and ruled that their “risk profiles” justified “continuing detention”.
Police have also stated that the present bail pleas are in the teeth of the top court’s January 5 order, which asked them to seek release only after completion of the examination of protected witnesses or after one year, whichever is earlier.
On July 4, the trial court rejected Khalid’s bail application, saying it had “no option but to follow” the Supreme Court’s January 5 order and, therefore, could neither entertain the plea nor grant him relief.
On September 2, 2025, a high court division bench denied bail to Khalid and Imam.
On January 5, the Supreme Court upheld the verdict but granted relief to co-accused Gulfisha Fatima, Meeran Haider, Shifa Ur Rehman, Mohammad Saleem Khan and Shadab Ahmad.
A bench of Justice Aravind Kumar and Justice N V Anjaria had then observed that there was a prima facie case against Khalid and Imam under the UAPA.
On May 22, the top court granted six months’ interim bail to co-accused Abdul Khalid Saifi and Tasleem Ahmad, as it referred the issue of prolonged incarceration of the undertrials under UAPA due to stringent prerequisites for granting bail to a larger bench.
