The Supreme Court today(October 26) refused to entertain the plea of Delhi riots larger conspiracy case accused Shadab Ahmad to leave the National Capital Territory of Delhi in order to attend classes at a Law University in Ghaziabad.

The Court dismissed the plea as withdrawn giving liberty to the accused to approach the Trial Court.

Ahmad has filed a miscellaneous application seeking modification of bail condition number (ii), which prohibits him from leaving the NCTD without prior permission of the Trial Court. He also sought modification of the bail condition number (v) to mark his attendance in the Station House Officer, Police Station Crime Branch, Delhi Police, Office of the Commissioner of Police, Police Headquarters, Jai Singh Marg once a week instead of two days(Monday and Thursday) as imposed by the Supreme Court.

It may be recalled that Ahmed was granted bail along with Gulfisha Fatima, Meeran Haider, Shifa-ur-Rehman, Mohd. Saleem Khan by a bench comprising Justice Aravind Kumar and Justice NV Anjaria on January 5 under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967. Subsequently, a Delhi Court had ordered the release of Ahmed on January 8.

Today, when the matter was taken up by a bench comprising Justice Kumar and Justice Vipul M Pancholi, Ahmed's counsel submitted that he is on the path of "reformation" and has secured admission in a law school in Ghaziabad. To this, Justice Kumar outrightly refused to modify and questioned whether the accused had gone to the Trial Court or not first.

The counsel informed that the Trial Court didn't deal with the second bail condition as it has to be done by the Supreme Court only. He further submitted that the session has already started in August and he is running behind the schedule.

"He has to attend classes on Tuesdays and Sundays. He is on the path of reformation mylords. He has secured admission in law college mylords. He applied for a 3 years course in Delhi University and he was not able to secure admission there. He will go in the morning and come in the evening. Classes are from 10 to 3pm, mylords. 10 km from Delhi."

Justice Kumar refused and remarked: "Go tell the Trial Court. This we will not modify...We know why you have joined that law college, leaving out all the law colleges inside Delhi."

Ultimately, the counsel requested to withdraw the petition, which the Court allowed. It ordered: "The counsel seeks leave of the court to withdraw. Dismissed with liberty to approach the trial court."

The Supreme Court had imposed 11 bail conditions on them, including prohibitions on attending rallies or public meetings and on circulating posters, banners or other campaign material in any form. They were directed to execute a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 2 lakh, with two local sureties of the like sum to the satisfaction of the Trial Court. They have been specifically barred from participating in any public meetings or gatherings and from circulating posts, handbills, posters or banners, whether physically or through electronic or digital platforms.

The petitioners, who were student activists at the forefront of organising anti-Citizenship Amendment Act protests in 2019-2020, are facing charges under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act and the Indian Penal Code for allegedly formulating the "larger conspiracy" behind the communal riots that took place in the national capital in the last week of February 2020.