1 day ago
Delhi High Court Again Denies Bail to Khalid, Imam
The Delhi High Court again refused to release Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam on bail.
Bail would let them leave jail while their trial continues.
They are accused under a strict national security law in a case about the 2020 Delhi riots.
The violence happened during protests against a citizenship law and a proposed register of citizens.
The Supreme Court had earlier refused their bail but said they could ask again after protected witnesses were questioned or after one year.
The court said neither of those things has happened yet.
Their lawyers pointed to their long time in jail and bail given to some other accused people.
The High Court said the other accused had different alleged roles and that it had to follow the Supreme Court’s directions.
The Delhi High Court again rejected bail pleas by former Jawaharlal Nehru University students Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam.
Both have been in custody for about six years in the 2020 North-East Delhi riots conspiracy case.
The court said it was bound by the Supreme Court’s January 5, 2026 order and could not alter its conditions.
The Supreme Court allowed renewed bail pleas after protected witnesses were examined or one year had passed, whichever came first; neither condition has been met.
Khalid and Imam face charges under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act over violence that killed more than 50 people during protests against the Citizenship (Amendment) Act and proposed National Register of Citizens.
- Who
- Former Jawaharlal Nehru University students Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam, who are accused under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act.
- What
- The Delhi High Court rejected their latest bail pleas in the 2020 North-East Delhi riots conspiracy case.
- Where
- The Delhi High Court, in a case concerning violence in North-East Delhi.
- When
- Wednesday, September 30, 2026; the relevant Supreme Court order was issued on January 5, 2026.
- Why
- The court said judicial discipline required it to follow the Supreme Court’s directions, and the conditions for renewed bail pleas had not been met.
Arguments for Bail
Reasons for Continuing Custody
Lengthy detention
Arguments for Bail
Khalid and Imam argued that their custody for about six years, without trial, represented a change in circumstances and raised concerns about prolonged pre-trial incarceration.
Reasons for Continuing Custody
The Delhi Police opposed bail and described the two as masterminds, while relying on the Supreme Court’s directions concerning the timing of any renewed plea.
Bail granted to other accused
Arguments for Bail
Their lawyers referred to the Supreme Court’s decision granting bail to other accused and to interim bail granted to co-accused Tasleem Ahmed and Khalid Saifi.
Reasons for Continuing Custody
The High Court said Ahmed and Saifi were alleged to have different roles, so Khalid and Imam could not claim bail on the basis of parity.
Legal interpretation
Arguments for Bail
The defence cited later UAPA rulings and the constitutional guarantee of a speedy trial under Article 21.
Reasons for Continuing Custody
The High Court said another Supreme Court judgment could not override the specific directions in Khalid and Imam’s case, and granting bail now would effectively modify those directions.
Key facts
- Case
- 2020 Delhi riots conspiracy case, registered as FIR 59 of 2020
- Accused
- Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam
- Charges
- Charges under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act and the Indian Penal Code
- Custody
- About six years without trial
- High Court ruling
- Bail pleas rejected again
- Supreme Court condition
- A renewed plea could be filed after protected witnesses were examined or one year had passed from January 5, 2026, whichever came first
- Deaths
- More than 50 people died in the February 2020 violence
Quotes
Delhi High Court division bench
The division bench comprising Justices Prathiba M Singh and Dinesh Bhatt.
“In view of the above discussion and the overall facts of the case, specifically the conditions imposed upon the appellants, this court cannot find fault with the decision of the trial court. Accordingly, the appeals are dismissed.”
telegraphindia.com
“We would be modifying this (Supreme Court) order if we allow bail, which we cannot do.”
telegraphindia.com
Sources
Related news
Delhi Court Grants Sharjeel Imam Seven-Day Interim Bail
Delhi High Court Defers Khalid, Imam Bail Hearing Until September
Delhi High Court Grants Bail After Five Years’ Custody
Delhi High Court Grants Bail to Two UAPA Accused
Delhi High Court Grants Bail After Eight-Year Terror Trial Delay
Delhi High Court Grants Bail After Eight Years’ Incarceration
Madhya Pradesh High Court Reconsiders OBC Creamy Layer Application
Supreme Court Says CBDT Circulars Cannot Override Income Tax Act
Supreme Court Warns Elected Leaders Against Attacking Doctors
Supreme Court Cancels Bail Over Assault on Hospital Doctors
Debate Over Ballot Papers, EVMs and Election Trust Continues
