Umar Khalid in Court on 2020 Delhi Riots: ‘No Proof Against Me, Only Witness Statements’

Senior Advocate Trideep Pais, representing Khalid, made the submissions before Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) Sameer Bajpai of Karkardooma Courts while opposing the framing of charges in FIR 59 of 2020, which is being probed by the Delhi Police Special Cell.

“This is a case of no physical evidence, other than one speech. You can catch hold of anyone 11 months after the event, get them to say anything, and call it a UAPA case. The prosecution’s case is that it doesn’t need evidence, it only needs statements,” Pais submitted.

He argued that if the Court were to rely solely on statements recorded months after the riots, the case “will go nowhere” and “should not have proceeded as an FIR even.” He reiterated that there was no recovery, no financial trail, and no allegation of fund procurement against Khalid.

Pais clarified that Khalid was added to four WhatsApp groups but sent only three messages, all in the DPSG group, and none in others, including MSJ. He also flagged the timing of the witness statements, calling them “extremely suspicious,” as they were recorded months or even a year after the alleged conspiracy.

“Normally, some kind of evidence precedes an FIR. Here, the FIR came first and the statements much later. If the conspiracy was known in March, why does the main witness surface in September?” he questioned, adding that key witnesses allegedly took part in protest activities yet were “conveniently treated as witnesses, not accused.”

Pais further reminded the court that Khalid, accused only in one of the 751 FIRs filed in the riots, has been in custody since September 2020. He earlier described the case as a “joke of an FIR” and accused the police of “pick and choose” action, selectively naming Khalid while sparing others with “bigger roles.”

The hearing will continue on October 28 and 29.

The Delhi High Court, on September 2, denied bail to Khalid, observing that the role attributed to him and co-accused Sharjeel Imam appeared “grave.” Khalid has challenged the denial of bail before the Supreme Court, which will hear the matter on October 27.

While denying bail, the Delhi High Court had observed that “violence in the name of protest is not free speech” as it dismissed the bail pleas of Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam, and seven others in the Delhi riots larger conspiracy case. A Division Bench of Justice Navin Chawla and Justice Shalinder Kaur, in a detailed 133-page verdict, said, “Any conspiratorial violence under the garb of protests or demonstrations by citizens cannot be permitted. Such actions must be regulated and checked by the State machinery, as they do not fall within the ambit of the freedom of speech, expression, and association.”

The Court had held that the role of Sharjeel Imam and Umar Khalid is prima facie grave in the entire conspiracy, noting that they had delivered inflammatory speeches on communal lines to instigate a mass mobilization of members of the Muslim community. The plea of parity with co-accused was also rejected. The judges had said that although others were present in conspiratorial meetings and WhatsApp groups, their role was “limited when juxtaposed with these Appellants.

Besides Khalid, there are nearly seventeen accused in the case. Delhi Police’s Special Cell had registered FIR 59 of 2020, naming several individuals including, Sharjeel Imam, Tahir Hussain, Khalid Saifi, Ishrat Jahan, Meeran Haider, Gulfisha Fatima, and Shifa-ur-Rehman. The accused have been charged under stringent provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) as well as sections of the Indian Penal Code relating to criminal conspiracy, promoting enmity, rioting, and murder.

The case stems from the violence that erupted in Northeast Delhi in 2020 during protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA). The clashes between supporters and opponents of the Act led to large-scale incidents of stone-pelting, arson, and violence, leaving 53 people dead and injuring thousands.

Hearing Date: October 17, 2025

Bench: Additional Sessions Judge Sameer Bajpai