Read Time: 06 minutes

Additional Sessions Judge of Karkardooma Court, Shri Vinod Yadav, granted bail to Umar Khalid today.

Khalid had been in custody in connection with offences charged upon him during Delhi Riots.

Shri Manoj Chaudhary, Learned Special Public Prosecutor appeared for the State.

“The applicant cannot be made to incarcerate in jail for infinity merely on account of the fact that other persons who were part of the riotous mob have to be identified and arrested in the matter”, noted the Learned Judge.

It was further added that the applicant has merely been roped in the matter on basis of his own disclosure statement and the disclosure statements of co-accused, Tahir Hussain and Khalid Saifi.

Following were the facts taken into account while granting bail by the Court:

1. Applicant has been under judicial custody since 01.10.2020.
2. The applicant was not visible in any CCTV footage/viral video(s) pertaining to the scene of crime on the date of incident.
3. There is no identification of the applicant either through independent public witness or any police witness of he being present at the scene of crime on the date of incident.
4. Even the CDR location of the mobile phone of applicant has not been found at the scene of crime on the date of incident.
5. No recovery of any sort has been effected from the applicant pursuant to his disclosure statements of the co-accused in the matter.
6. Argument of the learned Public prosecutor that the applicant had been in regular contact with the co-accused, is inconsequential, as prima facie that does not in any way go on to establish the criminal conspiracy alleged against the applicant in the matter.
7. Statement of PW Rahul Kasana made on the grounds of criminal conspiracy ‘does not appeal to the senses’.
8. Reliance is placed on the judgment of Devangna Kalita, where the High Court allowed bail application on the ground that the only material available against the accused was disclosure statement of the co-accused Shahrukh; “The case of applicant herein is at a better footing than the case of Devangna Kalita. After all, the disclosure statement of co-accused Tahir Hussain, recorded on 11.03.2020 did not lead to any recovery of fact, except for the recording of disclosure statement(s) of co-accused Khalid Saifi and applicant. Accused Tahir Hussain is an accused in ten other cases of this cluster of Chand Bagh puliya, i.e, at or around his house, but in no other case the applicant has been made co-accused, even on the strength of material sought to be read against him in this matter.”
9. No substance in the argument that bail applications of as many as three accused in the matter have already been dismissed so the applicant is also not entitled to bail.
10. It is a matter of record that co-accused Khalid Saifi has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide detailed order dated 04.11.2020 and the learned Special PP has been unable to establish that the role assigned to applicant is not similar to the role attributed to co-accused Khalid Saifi.

Case Title: State v. Umar Khalid, Bail Application No. 506 of 2021