Delhi Riots Conspiracy Case: Court Reserves Verdict On Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam's Fresh Bail Pleas
A Delhi court reserved its order on the fresh bail pleas of Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam in the larger conspiracy case related to the 2020 Delhi riots
A Delhi court on Saturday reserved its order on the fresh bail applications filed by activists Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam in the larger conspiracy case linked to the 2020 northeast Delhi riots.
Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) Sameer Bajpai of Karkardooma Court reserved the matter after hearing detailed submissions from both the prosecution and the defence.
The order is expected to be pronounced later in the day or on July 6.
Both Khalid and Imam sought bail on the ground that their continued incarceration without commencement of trial violates their fundamental right to personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution.
Khalid's application argued that significant judicial developments since the Supreme Court rejected his earlier bail plea on January 5, 2026, constitute a material change in circumstances warranting fresh consideration.
Referring to subsequent Supreme Court observations in a terror-related matter, Khalid relied on the principle that "bail is the rule" even in cases under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA). His plea also cited the Court's criticism of prolonged incarceration under anti-terror laws, contending that UAPA provisions cannot justify indefinite detention where trial is unlikely to conclude within a reasonable time.
The application further relied on landmark Supreme Court judgments, including Union of India v. K.A. Najeeb and Vernon Gonsalves v. State of Maharashtra, to argue that constitutional guarantees of liberty prevail when prolonged detention becomes punitive due to delay in trial.
Imam, in his bail plea, submitted that there had been no meaningful progress in the proceedings even six months after the Supreme Court denied him bail. He argued that he has remained in custody for nearly six years while charges are yet to be framed.
Khalid similarly contended that the trial has not commenced despite his incarceration for almost six years. He submitted that, given the large number of accused persons, witnesses and documentary evidence relied upon by the prosecution, the trial is unlikely to begin in the near future.
The fresh bail pleas have been filed after a coordinate Bench of the Supreme Court recently raised questions regarding the interpretation adopted while denying bail to the two accused in the case.
Background of the Case
The case arises out of FIR No. 59/2020, registered by the Delhi Police Special Cell in connection with the alleged larger conspiracy behind the communal violence that erupted in North East Delhi in February 2020. The FIR invokes multiple provisions of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, along with offences under the UAPA.
In his bail application, Sharjeel Imam has highlighted that despite more than six months having elapsed since the Supreme Court's judgment refusing bail, there has been no meaningful progress in the trial. He has pointed out that arguments on charge are yet to conclude and that he has remained incarcerated for nearly six years.
Imam has contended that the prolonged delay in the proceedings has resulted in continued detention without commencement of trial, strengthening his claim for grant of regular bail.
Umar Khalid has also sought regular bail on similar grounds before the trial court.
The two accused are among several individuals facing prosecution in the conspiracy case. Others named in the FIR include former AAP councillor Tahir Hussain, Khalid Saifi, Ishrat Jahan, Meeran Haider, Gulfisha Fatima, Shifa-ur-Rehman, Asif Iqbal Tanha, Shadab Ahmed, Tasleem Ahmed, Saleem Malik, Mohammad Saleem Khan, Athar Khan, Safoora Zargar, Faizan Khan and Natasha Narwal. The prosecution alleges that the accused were part of a larger conspiracy that culminated in the North East Delhi riots of February 2020. The accused have consistently denied the allegations.
Recently, the High Court had granted Khalid a three-day interim bail in the larger conspiracy case connected to the 2020 northeast Delhi riots, allowing him to meet his mother, who is scheduled to undergo surgery, and attend the Chehlum ceremony of his deceased uncle. The Court had held that the circumstances warranted a humanitarian approach and temporarily released Khalid despite the pendency of serious charges against him under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (UAPA). By granting only three days of interim bail instead of the fifteen days sought, the High Court sought to balance Khalid’s personal circumstances with the concerns raised by the prosecution regarding the nature of the allegations against him.
Earlier, Additional Sessions Judge Sameer Bajpai at Karkardooma court rejected the bail plea of Umar Khalid.
Bench: ASJ Sameer Bajpai
Hearing Date: July 4, 2026