Read Time: 05 minutes

Synopsis

Umar Khalid on Friday moved an application through Senior Advocate Trideep Pais for interim bail before a Delhi Court. Khalid has sought interim bail for a period of two weeks in the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act case against him.

Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) Amitabh Rawat of the Karkardooma Court, Delhi directed the prosecution to file a reply in the plea, after verifying the contents mentioned in the application.

The court noted, “This is a fresh application u/s. 439 Cr. P.C moved on behalf of the applicant/accused Umar Khalid seeking interim bail for a period of two weeks.”

“Put up for filing of reply and arguments on the interim bail application of applicant/accused Umar Khalid on 25.11.2022,” the court ordered.

The Delhi High Court in October denied bail to Delhi riots accused Umar Khalid who had challenged the lower court's order denying bail, finding Khalid's role in the Delhi Riots conspiracy. Khalid has been arrested for allegations under several provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act.

A division bench of Justice Siddhartha Mridul and Justice Rajnish Bhatnagar had said, "We don't find any fair merit in the appeal".

Umar Khalid had challenged the lower court's order rejecting his bail application on the grounds that there is no evidence linking him to the violence that erupted in Delhi during the riots. The High Court on September 9, had reserved its judgment in Khalid's appeal after the completion of the arguments put forth by both the parties.

Background:

On September 13, 2020, Umar Khalid was arrested in connection with communal clashes that broke out in northeast Delhi in February 2020, after violence between Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019 supporters, and its protesters became out of control, leaving many people dead and several injured.

While denying Khalid bail, ASJ Amitabh Rawat of Karkardooma Court found that Khalid's name is a "recurring mention" from the beginning of the conspiracy till the riots & that there are numerous statements of witnesses (recorded before the magistrate and before the police) highlighting "incriminating material" against the accused Umar Khalid.

Khalid challenged the said order before the Delhi High Court on the ground that there is no evidence linking him to the violence that erupted in Delhi during the riots.

Case Title: State v. Tahir Hussain & Ors.