Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam refused bail in SC

Citing evidence of a criminal conspiracy, the Supreme Court on Monday refused bail to student activists Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam in the conspiracy case involving the 2020 Delhi riots.

However, five additional accused—Gulfisha Fatima, Meeran Haider, Shifa Ur Rehman, Mohd Saleem Khan, and Shadab Ahmed—were granted bail by a bench of Justices Aravind Kumar and NV Anjaria. The judge dismissed Khalid and Imam’s bail requests, stating that the prosecution had presented enough evidence to create a prima facie case linking them to the alleged criminal conspiracy.

“This court is satisfied that the prosecution material discloses a prima facie allegation against the appellants Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam. The statutory threshold stands attracted qua these appellants. At this stage of the proceedings, their enlargement on bail is not justified,” the bench observed.

Additionally, the court made a clear distinction between Khalid and Imam and the other accused, pointing out that their roles in the prosecution’s story and the supporting evidence were qualitatively different.

“Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam stand on a qualitatively different footing from the remaining accused, both in prosecution narrative and in evidentiary basis relied upon. This structural distinction cannot be ignored and must inform any judicial determination relating to culpability, parity, or the applicability of penal provisions requiring a heightened threshold of intent and participation,” the bench said.

The result came after the court decided on December 10 to postpone making a decision regarding the accused’s appeals against the Delhi High Court’s September 2 ruling, which had denied bail in the conspiracy case connected to the unrest in northeast Delhi.

Senior attorneys Kapil Sibal, Abhishek Singhvi, Siddhartha Dave, Salman Khurshid, and Sidharth Luthra represented the accused, while Solicitor General Tushar Mehta and Additional Solicitor General SV Raju represented the Delhi Police.

The Delhi Police opposed bail, claiming that the riots were the result of a “pre-planned and well-designed” plot to weaken India’s sovereignty rather than being spontaneous. According to the prosecution, each of the defendants was therefore accountable for the actions taken to carry out that plan.

Umar, Sharjeel, and the other accused were charged under the provisions of the former Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), an anti-terror law, for allegedly being the “masterminds” of the deadly riots in northeast Delhi that resulted in 53 fatalities and over 700 injuries.