Supreme Court Grants Conditional Bail to Five Accused in 2020 Delhi Riots Case — Rejects Bail of Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam

Case Background — UAPA Charges and Alleged Larger Conspiracy

The case arises from the alleged “larger conspiracy” behind the 2020 Delhi riots, investigated under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA). The prosecution alleged that the riots were the outcome of a coordinated conspiracy involving planning, mobilisation, and execution through protest networks.

Multiple FIRs, supplementary charge sheets, and protected witnesses formed part of the case record. The Delhi High Court earlier referred to Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam as “intellectual architects” of the alleged conspiracy.

Several accused challenged continued incarceration on grounds of prolonged custody and delay in trial.

Supreme Court Grants Bail to Five Co-Accused — With Eleven Stringent Conditions

The Supreme Court granted bail to five accused:

• Gulfisha Fatima
• Meeran Haider
• Shifa-ur-Rehman
• Mohd. Saleem Khan
• Shadab Ahmed

The Court imposed eleven strict bail conditions, including:

• Personal bond of ₹2 lakh with two local sureties
• Mandatory stay within Delhi NCR limits
• Surrender of passports
• Twice-weekly attendance at the Delhi Crime Branch
• No contact with witnesses or co-accused
• No public meetings, protests, rallies or virtual gatherings
• No social media publications relating to the case
• No posts, banners, circulars or pamphlet circulation
• Compliance with trial proceedings
• Maintenance of good behaviour
• Risk of bail revocation on breach

The Court also directed the SHO to maintain an attendance register and furnish monthly compliance reports to the trial court.

The Court clarified that granting bail did not amount to innocence determination but reflected a calibrated balancing of liberty and security.

Supreme Court Rejects Bail for Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam

The Court declined bail to:

• Umar Khalid
• Sharjeel Imam

holding that they were placed on a “qualitatively different footing” from other co-accused.

The Court emphasised:

• their alleged central and formative role in conceptualising and coordinating activities
• the statutory nature and gravity of allegations
• the UAPA framework requiring higher thresholds for bail

The Court ruled that prolonged incarceration alone cannot override the statutory bar where a prima facie case exists.

The Court further directed:

• they may apply for bail after examination of protected witnesses
or
• after one year from the present order — whichever occurs earlier

This effectively postpones any fresh bail attempt within that period, unless trial circumstances materially change.

Court’s Interpretation — UAPA Bail Requires Accused-Specific Assessment

The Court reiterated that Section 43-D(5) UAPA establishes a distinct bail regime.

Bail cannot be evaluated on parity alone.

The Court adopted an “individualised assessment approach”, noting a hierarchy of participation among accused persons.

The Court rejected the argument that the case was limited to public disorder, holding that:

• terrorist act under Section 15 UAPA
• is not confined to explosives or physical weapons

The Court recognised:

• coordinated mobilisation
• planning networks
• facilitation
• logistical and communication chains

may fall within UAPA thresholds even without physical execution participation.

Key Statutory Provisions Involved

Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967

Relevant provisions include:

• Section 2(o) — Unlawful Activity
• Section 13 — Punishment for Unlawful Activities
• Section 15 — Terrorist Act
• Section 17 — Raising funds for terrorist acts
• Section 18 — Conspiracy and recruitment
• Section 20 — Membership of terrorist organisation
• Section 43-D(5) — Statutory bar on bail where prima facie case exists

Section 43-D(5) forms the legal foundation for restricted bail discretion, requiring courts to assess whether prosecution materials disclose a prima facie case.

Constitutional Provisions Considered

The case invokes interplay between:

• Article 14 — Equality before law
• Article 19(1)(a) — Freedom of speech
• Article 19(1)(b) — Freedom of assembly
• Article 21 — Personal liberty & due process
• Article 22 — Safeguards during detention

The Court held that constitutional freedoms cannot override statutory security frameworks where the alleged conduct crosses from dissent into organised unlawful activity.

At the same time, the Court emphasised judicial responsibility in maintaining proportionality and scrutiny.

Important Judicial Precedents Relied Upon

The Supreme Court’s approach aligns with earlier rulings, including:

Vijay Madanlal Choudhary v. Union of India (2022)

(affirming strict statutory bail thresholds in special statutes)

National Investigation Agency v. Zahoor Ahmad Shah Watali (2019)

(establishing "prima facie assessment standard" at bail stage)

K.A. Najeeb v. Union of India (2021)

(permitting constitutional courts to intervene in exceptional long-custody situations — but not by default)

State of Maharashtra v. Gajanan (2022)

(reiterating that UAPA bail is distinct from ordinary criminal law)

The Court clarified that prolonged incarceration cannot be treated as an automatic override to statutory embargo unless extraordinary circumstances justify constitutional intervention.

Supreme Court’s Observations on Delay & Trial Progress

The accused argued that the trial is prolonged and custody amounts to pre-trial punishment.

The Court examined records and held:

• trial delay was not attributable solely to prosecution inaction
• evidence and witness examinations are ongoing
• statutory bar remains applicable where prima facie case stands

The Court urged the trial court to expedite proceedings.

Role of Counsel in the Case

Appearing for prosecution:

• Solicitor General Tushar Mehta
• Additional Solicitor General S.V. Raju

Appearing for accused:

• Kapil Sibal
• Abhishek Manu Singhvi
• Salman Khurshid
• Siddharth Luthra
• Siddharth Dave
• Siddharth Agarwal

The defence emphasised constitutional protest rights, while the prosecution highlighted coordinated conspiracy structures.

Significance of the Judgment

This ruling clarifies key principles for UAPA bail jurisprudence:

• Parity does not apply uniformly among accused
• Courts must assess role-specific culpability
• Long custody alone cannot displace statutory bar
• Preventive safeguards remain judicially supervised
• Freedom-security balance must be carefully structured

It strengthens the interpretive framework on:

• conspiracy liability
• pre-trial bail thresholds
• hierarchy of participation
• evidentiary scrutiny at prima facie stage

Conclusion — A Calibrated Exercise of Constitutional Discretion

The Supreme Court’s ruling marks a nuanced balance between:

• liberty of individuals
• statutory national security framework
• judicial restraint at pre-trial stages

While five accused obtained conditional liberty, the Court withheld relief for those alleged to be central organisers, reinforcing the doctrine of differentiated culpability.

The judgment will likely serve as a key precedent on:

• UAPA bail standards
• conspiracy-linked prosecutions
• constitutional limits in security statutes

The case will continue to evolve at the trial stage, with emphasis on evidence evaluation and protected witness testimony.

Location: Pune, Maharashtra, India

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts

Father of RG Kar Victim Loses Faith in Legal System Amid Allegations of CBI Inconsistencies

Image
  A Father’s Frustration with the System The father of the 31-year-old postgraduate doctor who was raped and murdered at Kolkata’s RG Kar Medical College on August 9, 2024, has publicly expressed his deep disillusionment with the Indian legal system. In a powerful and emotional statement, he told ANI that the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has presented contradictory reports in two different courts—the Calcutta High Court and Sealdah District Court. “This is not just a failure of investigation—this is a betrayal. Even Supreme Court judges could not believe the differences in what the CBI is saying. We had faith in the agency, but now, we are losing all hope,” he stated. Allegations of Withheld Evidence The father alleged that the CBI is deliberately withholding key details about the case, despite reportedly knowing who the perpetrators are. He believes the answers lie in his daughter’s phone, which the CBI claims it does not possess—an assertion he disputes. According t...
Read more

Bill Gates Applauds India's 'Namo Drone Didi' Program: A Game-Changer in Rural Empowerment and Agri-Tech

Image
Microsoft Founder Bill Gates Lauds India’s Namo Drone Didi Program In a strong endorsement of India’s evolving rural development model, Microsoft founder Bill Gates has praised the Namo Drone Didi initiative, launched in 2023 by the Government of India. The program empowers rural women by training them to operate drones for agricultural purposes, thereby boosting productivity, reducing manual labor, and enhancing socio-economic inclusion. Gates shared a detailed video and blog highlighting his interaction with three "Drone Didis" from Bihar— Sangita Devi , Sumintra Devi , and Kajol Kumari —during his visit to Delhi last month. He applauded the initiative's early success and expressed optimism about its future scalability. What is the Namo Drone Didi Program? Launched under the vision of Prime Minister Narendra Modi, the Namo Drone Didi scheme is part of a broader strategy to promote women-led development and precision agriculture . It aims to provide 15,000 dro...
Read more

Encroachment on Public Land: A Growing Threat to Governance and Public Welfare

Image
Encroachment of public land has become one of the gravest challenges in India’s urban and rural governance. From roads and footpaths to village ponds and forest areas, illegal occupation of land not only undermines the rule of law but also threatens environmental sustainability, public resources, and the right to equitable access. The recent directive from the Allahabad High Court , ordering the removal of encroachments from public land within 90 days across Uttar Pradesh , marks a crucial step toward restoring accountability and protecting common property. Allahabad High Court’s Landmark Order In a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by Manoj Kumar Singh , it was alleged that a village pond in Chauka village of Mirzapur district was encroached upon by locals and that the administration failed to take action. The bench led by Justice P.K. Giri , in an order dated October 6, 2025 , directed the Uttar Pradesh government to remove all encroachments from public or utility lands wi...
Read more

Flight Operations Disrupted Amid India-Pakistan Tensions: Air India and IndiGo Cancel Multiple Flights on May 13, 2025

Image
🔹 Flight Cancellations Announced by Air India On Tuesday, May 13, 2025 , Air India officially announced the cancellation of two-way flight operations to and from the following eight airports : Jammu Leh Jodhpur Amritsar Bhuj Jamnagar Chandigarh Rajkot The airline posted a statement on its official X (formerly Twitter) account, stating: "In view of the latest developments and keeping your safety in mind, flights to and from Jammu, Leh, Jodhpur, Amritsar, Bhuj, Jamnagar, Chandigarh and Rajkot are cancelled for Tuesday, 13th May." Air India further assured passengers that they are closely monitoring the situation and will provide timely updates as operations resume in the coming days. 🔹 IndiGo Follows with Six Airport Cancellations Following Air India's decision, IndiGo Airlines also issued a travel advisory cancelling its flight operations for May 13, 2025, at the following six airports : Jammu Amritsar Chandigarh Leh ...
Read more

Equality Before Law

Image
                            Equality Before Law                                                   Introduction The rule of law was firstly introduced by A.V. Dicey in  his book "The Constitution Of England" in which there is rule which only prevails is law in which all are equal. In simple word if any wrong is being done which is not justifiable  by law committed by anyone that may be president, prime minister, or any individual are punishable because there is supremacy of law. Supremacy of law means the government which is power or the people who elected the government all will be treated equally before law.  Article 14 The Indian Constitution 1949, Article 14 guarantees "Equality before law The State shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the...
Read more

Rights of a Arrested Person in India

Image
One of the basic and important feature of our legal system in benefits goes to arrested person on the principal of presumption of innocence of the accused person until he/she found guilty at the end of trail on legal evidence. Rights include the rights of the accused at the time of arrest, at the time of search and seizure, during the process of trail and the like. In well known case of Meneka Ghandhi v. UOI it was interpreted that the procedure adopted  by the state must be fair, just and reasonable. The certain rights which arrested person need to know are as follows: 1. Right To Silence "it was essentially right to refuse to answer and incriminate oneself in the absence of proper charge. Not initially, the right to refuse to reply to proper charge." the Justice Malimath Committee. The dependent if he so desires can be witness in his trial. His confession in police station is not admissible in court. Only to the magistrate is admissible. The Indian constitution guarantees e...
Read more

Your Complete Online Guide to Land Records and Services in Bihar

Image
Introduction: The Shift Towards Digital Land Governance India’s land management system has traditionally relied on manual records maintained at local government offices. While foundational to governance and ownership, this manual system often led to bureaucratic delays, land disputes, and lack of transparency. Recognizing these issues, state governments across India have progressively adopted digital systems to make land-related services accessible, transparent, and efficient. Bihar Bhumi Portal: A Digital Leap in Land Management One of the leading examples of this digital transformation is Bihar’s Bihar Bhumi portal ( https://biharbhumilrc.com/ ), developed and maintained by the Revenue and Land Reforms Department of Bihar . The portal has become a centralized platform providing a wide range of land-related services to citizens, eliminating the need for in-person visits to land offices. Purpose and Vision The key objective behind launching the Bihar Bhumi portal was to empower...
Read more

Evolution of Constitution under Article 14 to 18

Image
 Evolution of Constitution under Article 14 to 18 INTRODUCTION The idea of equality referenced under Article 14 to Article 18 upgrades a more extensive idea and a more extensive part of the examination as the subject of equity itself shapes a vital and powerful idea in itself. The idea of fairness overwhelms the exceptionally two significant ideas of equivalent security of law and equity under the steady gaze of the law. Likewise, the idea of uniformity wins in a wide range of establishments and accommodates equivalent freedoms for people with the abrogation of unapproachable and nullification of titles. The idea is a more extensive methodology as it is significant for society to look to each individual with a similar methodology regardless of his sexual orientation, rank, and religion. The law is visually impaired and is equivalent for each individual as it says that balance wins for each individual and each individual has the option to be secured by the law. Evolution  The f...
Read more

Supreme Court Advocates for Childcare and Feeding Rooms in Public Spaces

Image
Supreme Court Advocates for Childcare and Feeding Rooms in Public Spaces The Supreme Court of India has suggested that the Union Government develop a comprehensive policy addressing the construction of feeding rooms and childcare facilities  in public places. This move aims to ensure that nursing mothers and their children can access basic amenities in a dignified and private manner, reinforcing their fundamental rights under the Indian Constitution. SC Encourages Policy Formulation A bench comprising Justice BV Nagarathna  and Justice N Kotiswar Singh  highlighted the absence of a structured framework to address this pressing issue. The court advised the Centre to propose a policy that could then be implemented across the states, scheduling the next hearing for December 10, 2024.   The apex court emphasized that before issuing formal directions, it was crucial to understand the Centre’s perspective on implementing the petitioner’s demand for childcare and feedi...
Read more

Supreme Court Allows Collection of Voice Samples from Witnesses — Not Just Accused Persons

Image
In a significant development that clarifies an important aspect of criminal procedure, the Supreme Court of India has ruled that a court can order voice sample collection not only from the accused but also from witnesses , if such evidence is necessary for a criminal investigation. The ruling further strengthens the scope of forensic evidence admissibility while ensuring that such orders do not violate the constitutional protection against self-incrimination. Voice Samples Do Not Amount to Self-Incrimination A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Bhushan R. Gavai and Justice K. Vinod Chandran observed that the act of furnishing a voice sample does not violate Article 20(3) of the Constitution, which protects an accused person from being compelled to be a witness against themselves. The bench clarified that providing a voice sample falls in the same category as submitting fingerprints, handwriting, or signature specimens , none of which amount to testimonial compulsion. Quoti...
Read more