New Delhi, September 30, 2026 (Yes Punjab News)
The Delhi High Court on Wednesday dismissed the bail pleas of student activists Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam in the 2020 northeast Delhi riots larger conspiracy case, holding that the circumstances allowing them to renew their applications had not arisen under an earlier Supreme Court order.
A Division Bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Dinesh Bhatt rejected their appeals against the Karkardooma Court’s orders denying them regular bail in the case registered under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) and other penal provisions.
The High Court said the Supreme Court’s January 5, 2026, order declining bail to Khalid and Imam had to be followed. The apex court had permitted them to renew their bail pleas after the examination of protected witnesses relied upon by the prosecution or after the expiry of one year from the date of its order, whichever was earlier.
Khalid and Imam had approached the High Court after the Karkardooma Court rejected their fresh bail applications, observing that it was bound by the Supreme Court’s earlier decision.
“The Court has no option but to follow the judgment dated January 5, 2026, as passed by the Supreme Court, whereby the petitions of both the applicants were dismissed,” the trial court had said.
Before the trial court, Khalid and Imam had argued that circumstances had changed since the Supreme Court denied them bail. Among other grounds, they cited the apex court’s subsequent decision to refer to a larger Bench the legal question of whether prolonged incarceration and trial delays could justify granting bail despite the restrictions under Section 43D(5) of the UAPA.
The prosecution opposed their pleas, arguing that there had been no substantial change in circumstances to warrant reconsideration and that the Supreme Court had already rejected their bail applications.
In separate replies, the Delhi Police described Khalid and Imam as alleged “masterminds” of the larger conspiracy and argued that the Supreme Court had placed them in a different category from certain other co-accused. The prosecution maintained that the apex court had already specified the circumstances in which the two could renew their bail pleas and that neither condition had been met when they filed their fresh applications.
The police also opposed the argument based on the Supreme Court’s reference to a larger Bench, submitting that referring a legal question for further consideration did not alter the law laid down in the earlier order concerning Khalid and Imam.
Earlier this year, the Supreme Court had declined to grant bail to both activists, holding that the prosecution material disclosed prima facie grounds attracting the statutory restrictions on bail under Section 43D(5) of the UAPA.
However, the Supreme Court granted bail to five co-accused in the case: Gulfisha Fatima, Meeran Haider, Shifa Ur Rehman, Mohd Saleem Khan and Shadab Ahmed.
More recently, the apex court granted six months’ interim bail to co-accused Tasleem Ahmed and Khalid Saifi while referring to a larger Bench the question of whether prolonged incarceration and trial delays could justify bail despite the restrictions under Section 43D(5) of the UAPA.
The case concerns an alleged larger conspiracy behind the communal violence that broke out in northeast Delhi in February 2020. Khalid and Imam are among several people charged under the UAPA and other penal provisions and have remained in custody for several years. The allegations against them remain subject to judicial proceedings.
FOLLOW NOW
