2020 Delhi Riots: Umar Khalid Moves Supreme Court For Review Of Bail Denial; Seeks Open Court Hearing
Umar Khalid files review petition in Supreme Court challenging denial of bail in Delhi riots conspiracy case
Umar Khalid has approached the Supreme Court seeking a review of its January 5 order that denied him bail in the larger conspiracy case linked to the 2020 Delhi riots.
The review petition is scheduled to be listed for hearing on Wednesday, i.e. April 15.
In January the Bench of Justices Aravind Kumar and NV Anjaria, which had rejected the bail pleas of Khalid and co-accused Sharjeel Imam. The Court had held that the material placed on record disclosed a prima facie case under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967.
In a detailed judgment, the Bench had observed that the prosecution’s case indicated a “central and formative role” played by the accused, involving planning, mobilisation, and strategic direction that went beyond isolated or localised acts.
Notably, while denying relief to Khalid and Imam, the Court had granted bail to several other accused in the same case, including Gulfisha Fatima, Meeran Haider, Shifa Ur Rehman, Mohd. Saleem Khan, and Shadab Ahmed.
The January 5 order had also imposed a restriction on Khalid and Imam, barring them from renewing their bail pleas until either the examination of protected witnesses is completed or one year has elapsed from the date of the order.
Today the review petition was mentioned before the Court by Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Khalid. Sibal informed the Bench that the matter is listed on Wednesday and requested that it be heard in open court.
“I wanted to make a mention… it is listed on Wednesday. My request is, if your Lordships could consider hearing it in open court,” Sibal submitted.
Justice Kumar stated, “We will look into the papers, and if required, we will call it,” indicating that the Court would decide on the mode of hearing after examining the case record.
It is to be noted that, on December 10, 2025, the Apex Court had reserved its verdict on the bail pleas. ASG Raju had strongly opposed the bail requests, asserting that the violence that rocked Northeast Delhi was not a peaceful protest against the Citizenship Amendment Act but part of a “well-planned conspiracy” to spark unrest and destabilise the government.
Opposing the bail pleas, Solicitor General Mehta had launched a sharp attack on what he described as “myths” surrounding the riots. “This was not a spontaneous riot. It was a well-designed, well-crafted, well-orchestrated, pre-planned and well-choreographed riot,” he told the Bench, adding that the violence amounted to “an attack on the sovereignty of the nation.”
Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal on behalf of Umar Khalid, argued that at the current pace, Khalid would remain in prison for “eight years without trial”, noting that the prosecution alternates between predicting six months and two years for the trial’s completion. Senior Advocate Dr. Abhishek Manu Singhvi for Gulfisha Fatima questioned the Delhi Police’s assertion that the riots were part of a coordinated “regime change operation,” pointing out that “not a word of it appears in the chargesheet.”
All the five UAPA Accused have filed a Special Leave petition (SLP) before the Apex Court challenging the Delhi High Court's September 2, order denying bail to them.The High Court had held “violence in the name of protest is not free speech” as it dismissed the bail pleas of Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam, and seven others.
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.
Bench: Justices Aravind Kumar and PB Varale
Mentioning Date: April 13, 2026