Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam And Others To Get Bail? SC Concludes Hearing In 2020 Delhi Riots Case

The court reserved its verdict after hearing arguments and requested additional documents by December 18.

The Supreme Court concluded hearings on bail pleas of seven accused in the 2020 Delhi riots, including Sharjeel Imam and Umar Khalid.

Source : PTI

The Supreme Court on Tuesday concluded detailed hearings on the bail applications of seven accused in the 2020 Delhi riots case, including prominent student activists Sharjeel Imam and Umar Khalid. After listening to arguments from both sides, the apex court reserved its verdict.

Apart from Imam and Khalid, the bail pleas of Meeran Haider, Gulfisha Fatima and Shifa-ur-Rehman were also taken up. The case is part of a wider set of prosecutions linked to the communal violence that erupted in northeast Delhi in 2020, killing several people and injuring hundreds.

Court Seeks Additional Documents by December 18

During the proceedings, the bench directed both the defence and the prosecution to submit additional supporting documents by December 18 to aid the court in arriving at its final decision.

A bench comprising Justice Aravind Kumar and Justice N.V. Anjaria heard the petitions challenging the September 2 order of the Delhi High Court, which had denied bail to the accused. All seven have been in custody for over five years and are facing serious charges under the stringent Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act.

Defence Flags Delay, Cites Lack of Proof of Instigation

The petitioners’ counsels focused their arguments on the prolonged delay and the uncertainty surrounding the commencement of the trial. According to Live Law, Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing for Gulfisha Fatima, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal for Umar Khalid and Senior Advocate Siddharth Dave for Sharjeel Imam asserted that there was still no concrete proof to show that the accused had instigated violence.

They argued that despite five years having passed since the arrests, the prosecution had failed to establish any direct role of the petitioners in triggering the riots. With the verdict now reserved, all eyes remain on the Supreme Court’s decision, which is expected to have significant implications for the long-pending case.