Court Denies Bail To Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam In Delhi Riots Larger Conspiracy Case

A Delhi Court on Saturday rejected the bail pleas filed by Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam in the case alleging larger conspiracy into the commission of 2020 North East Delhi riots registered under UAPA.Additional Sessions Judge Sameer Bajpai of Karkardooma Courts dismissed the bail pleas filed by both the accused persons. The Court has said that the judgment of Gulfisha Fatima and Syed Iftikhar Andrabi has already been referred to a larger bench by hte Supreme Court and as such unless the issue is settled, the Court cannot consider the bail applications of Khalid and Imam on any ground.The judge added that he has no option but to follow the Supreme Court's judgment denying bail to the duo.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 and Khalid would be at liberty to renew their prayer for grant of bail.“Thus, following the said order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, this Court cannot entertain the applications and grant bail to the applicants. Infact the applications are not maintainable and they are hereby dismissed,” the Court said.Earlier today, appearing for Khalid, senior advocate Trideep Pais recounted the events leading upto the present bail plea. He said that the Supreme Court had while refusing to grant bail to Khalid, said that for one year Umar and Sharjeel cannot apply for bail but in the meantime protected witnesses should be examined.He also referred to Supreme Court's order granting interim bail to Tasleem Ahmed and Khalid Saifi for six months, while referring to a larger bench the 'perceived conflict' in judgments on UAPA bail when trial is delayed. Pais emphasized, "I am in custody continuously. Even when I applied for SLP it continued. Change of circumstances in law, your honour has seen those orders. If I have to make submissions on merits, I am ready to make. But long and short is that there is no recovery, no statement leading to any discovery, I am not present, no violence alleged, there is only one video which is of 17 days prior in Amravati. I submit that I am entitled to bail".Appearing for Sharjeel Imam, advocate Talib Mustafa argued that the petitioner has already undergone substantial incarceration and there is no likelihood of trial ending anytime soon. He said that when other accused have been given relief then that benefit must accrue to Sharjeel as well.Opposing the bail pleas, the counsel for the prosecution argued, "The prayer for bail by both accused, shall be, not prior to embargo, only upon examination of protected witnesses or upon expiry of one year of the order. They also filed review, it was dismissed".For context, Khalid and Sharjeel had filed plea seeking review of Supreme Court's January 5 order, which was dismissed. BackgroundImam and Khalid have filed regular bail pleas after a coordinate bench of the Supreme Court questioned the ruling denying bail to them. 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 and Sharjeel.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 Najeeb which 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.Imam's bail plea highlighted that despite the passage of more than six months since the Supreme Court's judgment, there has been no meaningful progress in the trial proceedings.It was his case that with arguments on charge still remaining incomplete, Imam continues to undergo prolonged incarceration of nearly six years in the case.FIR 59 of 2020 is being probed by Delhi Police's Special Cell. The case has been registered under various offences under the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967.The accused in the case are Tahir Hussain, Umar Khalid, Khalid Saifi, Isharat Jahan, Meeran Haider, Gulfisha Fatima, Shifa-Ur-Rehman, Asif Iqbal Tanha, Shadab Ahmed, Tasleem Ahmed, Saleem Malik, Mohd. Saleem Khan, Athar Khan, Safoora Zargar, Sharjeel Imam, Faizan Khan and Natasha Narwal.click here to read order

Court Denies Bail To Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam In Delhi Riots Larger Conspiracy Case

Nupur Thapliyal

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Nupur Thapliyal

Court Denies Bail To Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam In Delhi Riots Larger Conspiracy Case

Nupur Thapliyal

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Nupur Thapliyal

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers