The Supreme Court on Tuesday heard arguments on the bail pleas of activists Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam and several others accused under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act in the 2020 Delhi riots conspiracy case. The Delhi Police strongly opposed their release, insisting that the violence was not a spontaneous fallout of protests against the Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA), but a carefully coordinated plan to spark communal unrest.
A bench of Justices Aravind Kumar and N V Anjaria is hearing the bail applications. The hearing remained inconclusive and will continue on November 20.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for Delhi Police, argued that the prosecution’s case showed a larger conspiracy.
He told the bench the riots were “orchestrated, pre-planned, and well-designed,” and not an emotional outburst from anti-CAA protests.
Mehta referred to a speech attributed to Sharjeel Imam, alleging he spoke of Muslims being unable to unite for an armed rebellion and called for road blockades across cities.
According to Mehta, “speech after speech, statement after statement” revealed an attempt to divide communities, adding that the narrative of a spontaneous riot was a “myth”.
He also claimed photographs recovered from the accused themselves showed them together “hatching the conspiracy”.
Responding to concerns over prolonged incarceration, Mehta submitted that the accused “delay the trial to gain a ground for bail,” adding that the police were prepared to complete the entire trial within six months if allowed to proceed without obstruction.
Additional Solicitor General S V Raju argued that the present accused cannot seek parity with three co-accused — Natasha Narwal, Devangana Kalita, and Asif Iqbal Tanha — who were granted bail in June 2021.
He reminded the bench that the Supreme Court had already clarified that those bail orders were not precedents.
Raju further contested the Delhi High Court’s May 2024 order granting statutory bail to Imam under Section 436-A CrPC, calling it erroneous because “bail cannot be granted solely on the basis of a CrPC provision when the additional rigours of UAPA apply”.
He maintained that there was no fresh circumstance warranting reconsideration of the court’s earlier rejection of Khalid’s bail.
Khalid, Imam, Gulfisha Fatima, Meeran Haider and others were arrested in 2020 for allegedly being the “masterminds” of the February riots, which left 53 people dead and over 700 injured. They were charged under UAPA and various provisions of the erstwhile IPC.
The violence broke out amid protests against the CAA and NRC.
All accused have denied the allegations.
The Delhi High Court had rejected bail for nine accused, including Khalid and Imam, holding that “conspiratorial” violence masked as protest could not be permitted.
It said citizens have the right to protest, but that right is “not absolute” and subject to reasonable restrictions. Disorderly protests that disturb public order fall outside constitutional protection.
The Supreme Court will resume hearing the matter on November 20. The accused remain in custody since 2020.
