Delhi Police Oppose Bail Pleas Of Sharjeel Imam, Umar Khalid In High Court, Says No Change In Circumstance
LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK
26 Aug 2026 9:31 PM IST
Sharjeel Imam and Umar Khalid
Opposing fresh bail pleas by Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam in the 2020 Delhi riots larger conspiracy case, the Delhi Police has told the High Court that the pleas are "illegal" and "an attempt to mislead" the court by projecting that Supreme Court judgment passed in an unrelated case amounts to change in circumstances to maintain the present proceedings.
For context, Khalid and Sharjeel had moved the high court challenging trial court's rejection of their third bail applications in the larger conspiracy case relating to the 2020 North East Delhi riots registered under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA). The high court issued notice in the matter last month on Khalid and Imam's bail pleas.
The police in its reply has said that Khalid and Imam are among the "masterminds" of the 2020 riots and referred to Supreme Court's order in Gulfisha Fatima's case and said that Supreme Court had held that the "risk profiles" of all accused are "markedly dissimilar" justifying continued detention for Khalid and Imam.
The police has also said that the Supreme Court had put an "embargo" against grant of bail to the two in keeping with the statutory scheme of the UAPA and thus the issue cannot be re-agitated on specious grounds. For context, the Supreme Court had while granting bail to Gulfisha Fatima and other co-accused and denying bail to Khalid and Imam had said that they can renew their bail applications after the examination of protected witnesses or after one year from apex court's judgment.
The police has said that the reliance placed on Supreme Court's decision in Syed Iftikhar Andrabi v/s NIA to contend that Supreme Court had expressed reservations with respect to the decision in Gulfisha Fatima and that in itself is a "change in circumstance" to seek bail, "cannot override the findings" of the apex court in the appellants' own case.
The police has said that the decision in Syed Iftikhar Andrabi does not deal with the Delhi Riots and that the "factual findings" recorded by the coordinate bench of the Supreme Court in Gulfisha Fatima have not been doubted in Andrabi judgment.
Background
Vide the impugned order, the trial court had said that the judgment of Gulfisha Fatima and Syed Iftikhar Andrabi has already been referred to a larger bench by the Supreme Court and as such unless the issue is settled, it could not consider the bail application of Khalid on any ground.
While also denying bail to co accused Sharjeel Imam, the trial court had added that it had no option but to follow the Supreme Court's judgment denying bail to both of them.
The Court noted that the Supreme Court had said that only on the completion of the examination of the protected witnesses or upon expiry of one year from the date of said order, whichever is earlier, Imam would be at liberty to renew their prayer for grant of bail.
On January 5 the Supreme Court had granted bail to Gulfisha Fatima, Meera Haider, Shifa Ur Rehman, Mohd. Saleem Khan and Shadab Ahmed; it had however denied bail to Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam.
Thereafter a coordinate division bench led by Justice BV Nagarathana had expressed reservations about the judgment in Gulfisha Fatima v. State saying that it did not properly follow the judgment delivered by a three-judge bench in 2021 in Union of India v. KA Najeebwhich recognised long delay in trial as a ground for bail in cases under UAPA.
In May, the division bench led by Justice Aravind Kumar, which had rejected Khalid and Sharjeel's bail pleas, while observing that there was a "perceived conflict" among different benches regarding the understanding of the 3-judge bench judgment in Union of India v KA Najeeb, referred the issue to a larger bench.
