The Delhi High Court on Wednesday reserved its verdict on the bail pleas of student activists Sharjeel Imam, Umar Khalid, and others who are facing prosecution under the stringent Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) for their alleged roles in orchestrating the February 2020 Delhi riots.
A division bench comprising Justices Navin Chawla and Shalinder Kaur reserved the order after hearing detailed arguments from both the prosecution and the defence counsels.
The prosecution, led by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, strongly opposed the bail pleas, asserting that the riots were not a spontaneous outbreak but the result of a “well-orchestrated conspiracy” intended to defame the country internationally. “If you do anything against your nation, you better be in jail till you are acquitted,” Mehta argued, emphasizing that prolonged incarceration alone does not warrant bail.
The accused, including Imam, Khalid Saifi, Gulfisha Fatima, and others, have been in custody since 2020. Their bail applications have cited prolonged incarceration and parity with co-accused who have already been granted bail.
Imam’s counsel argued that his client was neither present at the site of the violence nor linked to the co-accused in any meaningful way. He contended that Imam’s speeches and messages did not call for violence or unrest.
Umar Khalid and others are charged with being the “masterminds” of the riots, which broke out during anti-CAA and NRC protests in Northeast Delhi and resulted in the death of 53 people and injuries to over 700. The police have termed the violence a result of a “clinical and pathological conspiracy”, allegedly fueled by provocative speeches referencing the CAA-NRC, the Babri mosque, triple talaq, and Kashmir.
The defence has also questioned the delay in proceedings, but the prosecution denied any deliberate attempt to stall the trial, arguing that the right to a speedy trial does not equate to an automatic right to bail in cases involving national security.
The bail pleas, which have been pending since 2022, were heard by various benches over the years. The high court is expected to deliver its ruling in the coming weeks.
