Delhi riots case: HC rejects bail pleas of Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam
&imwidth=600&imheight=450&format=webp&quality=medium "Delhi riots case: HC rejects bail pleas of Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam")
Former JNU Student Umar Khalid Photograph: (ANI)
Delhi High Court rejects Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam’s bail pleas in the 2020 Delhi riots case, citing Supreme Court directions and differences in the roles attributed to the accused.
The Delhi High Court on Wednesday (Sep 30) rejected the bail pleas of former JNU scholar Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam in the 2020 North East Delhi riots case registered under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA).
A division bench of Justice Prathiba M Singh and Justice Dinesh Bhatt said it was bound by the Supreme Court’s January 2026 ruling in the case concerning Gulfisha Fatima and could not alter the conditions laid down by the apex court.
“This court is bound by judicial discipline,” the High Court said.
Court rejects bail pleas
The Supreme Court had earlier denied regular bail to Khalid and Imam while granting relief to several other accused. It had allowed them to renew their bail pleas after the examination of protected witnesses was completed or after one year from its January 5, 2026 order, whichever came earlier.
The High Court noted that Khalid and Imam had sought bail citing changes in circumstances, including developments concerning the Supreme Court’s Gulfisha Fatima judgment and interim bail granted to co-accused Tasleem Ahmed and Khalid Saifi.
Trending Stories
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
&im=FitAndFill=(700,400))
)
)
)
)
However, the bench held that the roles attributed to Ahmed and Saifi were different from those alleged against Khalid and Imam. Therefore, the two could not claim bail on the basis of parity.
Case returns to trial proceedings
Khalid and Imam had approached the High Court after a trial court rejected their bail applications on July 4. Their latest pleas were filed under Section 21 of the National Investigation Agency Act.
The case stems from FIR 59 of 2020, which concerns allegations of a larger conspiracy linked to the February 2020 communal violence in North-East Delhi. The prosecution case includes charges under the IPC and UAPA.
The High Court ultimately dismissed both appeals, leaving the Supreme Court’s January 2026 conditions intact.
