Delhi Riots Conspiracy Case : Supreme Court To Hear Khalid Saifi's Bail Plea, Rejects Claim For Parity With Co-Accused Given Bail

The Supreme Court today(February 18) issued notice in a plea filed by United Against Hate member Khalid Saifi, challenging the denial of bail by the Delhi High Court in connection with a case of a larger conspiracy into the Delhi riots of 2020, involving charges under the Indian Penal Code and UAPA.

A bench comprising Justice Aravind Kumar and Justice PB Varale however orally said that Saifi cannot claim parity with the Supreme Court's January judgment which granted bail to five co-accused.

Saifi has come against the September 2, 2025, order of the Delhi High Court denying bail to him. In January, the Supreme Court granted bail to five other accused in the case, while denying bail to Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam.

Later, the two remaining accused, Tasleem Ahmed and now Khalid Saifi has moved the Court. Notice has been issued in Tasleem Ahmed's petition. As per Saifi's plea, he has suffered five years of incarceration and is seeking parity with the Gulfisha and others, who were granted bail in the recent order by the Supreme Court.

At the outset, Justice Kumar asked Advocate Rajat Kumar(Saifi) what was the role attributed to the accused. Kumar informed that the allegation is that Saifi was a member of various WhatsApp groups such as DPSG, CAB Team, and United Against Hate, and the creator of various protest sites at Khureji, Karawal Nagar, Kardam Nargar and Nizamuddin. Further allegation is that he delivered an inflammatory speech intended to incite communal riots.

He is accused of having sent a message in the DPSG group, instructing people to cover CCTV cameras installed by the Police with black tape.

Kumar submitted that he may have been a part of the protest site at Khureji, but there is no evidence to suggest he was a part of other protest sites.

Justice Aravind Kumar then asked : "You want to incite people to communal riots, ah? And then you claim parity with those five persons?...Is this your main argument?...If you are claiming parity on our judgment, we will straightway say no!.. Second, you are saying that you never incited people to communal riots and you never gave speeches to that effect... "

Kumar submitted that no communal riots took place at the protest site, which was handled by Saifi, and there was no recovery of any weapon, etc. But Justice Kumar orally remarked that physical violence is not a necessity.

"If it happens at X, and you tell the people to go to Y and do it. And if it's not at the place where you gave a speech at X, if it does not take place it doesn't mean riots have not taken place. Please tell me how many people were killed?...We will tell you 153...And how many people were injured, and how many killed were police personnel? You should come equipped. Sorry, no," Justice Kumar averred.

Initially, the Court refused to issue an order, but later it issued notice and tagged with Tasleem matter.

Case Details: ABDUL KHALID SAIFI @ KHALID SAIFI Vs STATE (NCT OF DELHI)|Diary No. 7493 / 2026

Appearances: Rajat Kumar Adv appearing filed by Yash S Vijay AOR.