Delhi High Court Refuses Bail To Umar Khalid And Sharjeel Imam In 2020 Delhi Riots Conspiracy Case

The Delhi High Court has refused bail to Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam, and seven others linked to the 2020 Delhi riots conspiracy case. The violence in northeast Delhi resulted in over 50 deaths and hundreds of injuries. The court's decision affects former Jawaharlal Nehru University students Khalid and Imam, whose bail pleas have been pending since 2022.

Accusations and Legal Proceedings

Khalid and Imam are accused of orchestrating the communal violence that erupted in February 2020 over the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA). The police have labelled them as "masterminds" behind the unrest. They face charges under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act. Khalid was arrested in September 2020 and has remained in custody since then.

During a recent hearing, Khalid argued that being part of WhatsApp groups with other accused individuals did not constitute criminal activity. He also pointed out that no incriminating evidence or money was found on him. Meanwhile, Imam claimed he had no connection with Khalid or other co-accused individuals, arguing his speeches and chats did not incite violence.

Prosecution's Standpoint

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta represented the prosecution, opposing bail for the activists. He argued that the riots were premeditated with malicious intent, describing them as a "well-thought-out conspiracy." Mehta suggested it aimed to tarnish India's global reputation. He stated, "If you do anything against your nation, you better be in jail till you are acquitted."

The activists' lawyer announced plans to challenge this order in the Supreme Court. Previously, another bench had rejected Tasleem Ahmed's bail plea related to the same case. Khalid received a brief interim bail last December for a family wedding but remains incarcerated.

Activists' Arguments

The activists highlighted their prolonged detention of over four years and cited the trial's slow progress as reasons for seeking bail. Despite these arguments, their pleas were dismissed by Justices Navin Chawla and Shalinder Kaur. This decision also affected Mohd Saleem Khan, Shifa Ur Rehman, Athar Khan, Meeran Haider, Shadab Ahmed Abdul Khalid Saifi, and Gulfisha Fatima.

Imam maintained his innocence by stating he was not involved in any conspiracy as alleged by authorities. He insisted his communications never advocated unrest or violence.

The legal battle continues as both sides prepare for further proceedings. The case remains a significant point of contention due to its implications on freedom of speech and national security concerns within India.