Delhi riots case: Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam move Supreme Court for bail as one-year embargo nears end

Former Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) scholar Umar Khalid and student activist Sharjeel Imam have approached the Supreme Court demanding bail, arguing that the one-year-long imposed embargo is nearly at an end. He has been accused in the larger conspiracy case linked to the 2020 Delhi riots.

The bail pleas, filed on Wednesday, draw on the court’s earlier order, in which it had declined to grant them bail in the 2020 Delhi riots conspiracy case while allowing them to revive bail pleas once the protected witnesses had been examined or the expiry of one year, whichever is earlier.

In that earlier ruling, the court had separated Khalid and Imam’s case from that of five other accused who were granted bail in the same riots case, noting that the role attributed to the two men rested on a “qualitatively different footing.”

The court had said, “We are of the opinion that on the completion of the examination of the protected witnesses relied upon by the prosecution, or upon the expiry of a period of one year from the date of this order, whichever is earlier, these two appellants would be at liberty to renew their prayer for grant of bail before the jurisdictional court.”

Bail pleas turned down on September 30

Later, both the accused approached the Delhi High Court, where their bail pleas were turned down on September 30, citing the one-year embargo fixed by the top court. In response, the High Court bench of Justices Pratibha M Singh and Dinesh Bhatt stated that it is impossible for it to change the Supreme Court’s order.

Contesting the rejection, Khalid and Imam have asked the Supreme Court to take stock of where things currently stand, noting that they have now spent six years in custody while the prosecution has not yet examined a single witness out of the more than 900 named in the case, including 47 that it has classified as protected.

Advocate N Sai Vinod is representing Khalid in the matter, while Imam is being represented by advocate Fauzia Shakil. Both of them told the court that the case has reached the arguments-on-charge stage, with those arguments having wrapped up on July 13. However, the trial has stalled since then, as the trial judge is waiting for the Supreme Court to rule on a related plea, filed by a co-accused, seeking access to documents the prosecution does not intend to rely on. That judgment was reserved on September 1.