Delhi HC Denies Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam Bail, Cites Supreme Court Order

Synopsis

The Delhi High court on Wednesday refused to relax the bail conditions imposed by the Supreme Court in the case of north-east Delhi riots 2020, wherein Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam had appealed for bail. Bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Dinesh Bhatt pointed out that neither examination of protected witnesses nor one-year period had been completed. It is the third High Court refusal of such a ruling. Both men are denying the charges.

Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam on Wednesday have been denied bail in the anti-terrorism law UAPA case regarding "larger conspiracy" behind the riots in the north-east Delhi in February, 2020, by the Delhi high court. The pleas were dismissed by A Bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Dinesh Bhatt. It is the third time the HC has refused to grant them bail.

The Bench's reasoning

The Bench, however, said it could not change the Supreme Court's order dated 5 January which had directed the two accused to apply for bail either after the protected witnesses examined or after one year of the order, whichever is earlier. Neither of these conditions had been met and granting bail at this stage, would effectively be changing the order, the High Court said. The Bench said that the bail cannot be granted right now.

The appeals were against an order of bail which was rejected by the trial court on 4 July 2026. The High Court has ruled that there is no error in that decision. The Karkardooma Court had been under the directions of the Supreme Court of the 5th January.

Arguments in court

Mr. Khalid's Senior Advocate Trideep Pais said the trial would probably not be soon over. He also had the court consider that a large number of the 18 accused had already been granted bail by the Supreme Court.

“But the order itself in January acknowledged that Mr. Imam was not being served a fair process if he was to continue to be incarcerated without the trial making meaningful progress and therefore had a strong case for seeking bail,” Advocate Talib Mustafa, acting for Mr Imam, said.

The Additional Solicitor General (ASG) S.V. Raju for Delhi Police contended that the relief granted to five other accused was based on assessing each of their alleged roles. The two have been dubbed the “masterminds of the riots” by the police.

Delhi High Court has refused to grant bail to Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam amid a wave of protests by Delhi's youth.

In January, the Supreme Court decided the case

On 5th January a Bench of Justices Aravind Kumar and N.V. Anjaria made a prima facie finding against Mr. Khalid and Mr. Imam under the UAPA. It released on bail the five suspects—Gulfisha Fatima, Meeran Haider, Shifa Ur Rehman, Saleem Khan, and Shadab Ahmad—from prison.

The two were in a "qualitatively different footing" from the others accused, the judges wrote. Although the Court observed that a long period had been already spent in custody, it was not satisfied that it was “constitutionally impermissible” at that juncture.

Section 43D(5) of the UAPA introduces a new definition of vocabulary. If there is reasonable cause for believing that the accusation is prima facie true, the accused shall not be released on bail, the provision states.

Mr Khalid was detained on 13 September 2020. Mr. Imam has been arrested in Jehanabad, Bihar on 28 January 2020. A court in Delhi granted Mr. Khalid interim bail in December, 2025, for 15 days for the wedding of his sister.

His father S.Q.R. Ilyas said that granting him bail was "unfortunate" after the January decision. Mr. Khalid was pleased that the other accused got bail, a friend, Banojyotsna, wrote on X.

A question before a more numerous Bench

Since January, the terrain has shifted in the legal battle. The Supreme Court Bench comprising B.V. Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan in May disapproved of the Gulfisha Fatima ruling. On May 22, the Bench comprising Justice Aravind Kumar, referred a larger Bench the issue of how Article 21 would apply against the statutory bar on bail under Section 43D(5).

It also allowed six-month interim bail to the co-accused Tasleem Ahmed and Khalid Saifi. After a "case by case" analysis of the roles, the That Bench granted bail to five accused and denied bail to two in the case of Gulfisha Fatima. The coverage in this report is no reflection on the larger Bench's ruling.

What happens next

The one year period in the Supreme Court's order begins on January 5 and ends on January 2027, if not earlier, when the protected witnesses are examined.

There were 53 deaths and over 700 injuries as a result of the riots. The Supreme Court's Jan. 10 ruling would continue to cap their bail until one of the two conditions is fulfilled.