Supreme Court Dismisses Umar Khalid's Bail Review Petition in Delhi Riots Case
2020 Delhi riots case: SC rejects Khalid’s plea against bail denial
Hindustan Times
Image: Hindustan Times
The Supreme Court of India has rejected Umar Khalid's plea to review its January 5 decision denying him bail in the 2020 Delhi riots conspiracy case. The court found no grounds for reopening the case, emphasizing the serious nature of the allegations under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA).
- 01Umar Khalid's review petition for bail was dismissed by the Supreme Court.
- 02The court emphasized the serious nature of allegations against Khalid and co-accused Sharjeel Imam.
- 03Khalid has been in custody since September 2020, while Imam has been incarcerated since January 2020.
- 04The court ruled that prolonged incarceration does not justify bail under UAPA.
- 05Five co-accused were granted bail, indicating different levels of involvement in the conspiracy.
Advertisement
In-Article Ad
The Supreme Court of India has dismissed a review petition filed by Umar Khalid, a former student at Jawaharlal Nehru University, challenging the court's earlier denial of bail in the 2020 Delhi riots conspiracy case. The court, in its April 16 order, stated that there were no valid grounds to reconsider its January 5 ruling, which had denied bail under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA). The bench, comprising Justices Aravind Kumar and NV Anjaria, noted that Khalid's role, alongside co-accused Sharjeel Imam, was central to the alleged conspiracy, which resulted in communal violence in northeast Delhi, claiming 53 lives and injuring hundreds in February 2020. Khalid has been in custody since September 13, 2020, while Imam has been incarcerated since January 28, 2020. The court highlighted that the gravity of the allegations warranted their continued detention, and that prolonged incarceration alone does not justify bail in such cases. The Supreme Court also indicated that Khalid and Imam's involvement was distinct from that of five other co-accused, who were granted bail due to lesser allegations against them. The court's decision underscores the stringent measures in place under UAPA, particularly regarding cases involving threats to state security.
Advertisement
In-Article Ad
The Supreme Court's ruling reinforces the stringent application of UAPA, affecting the legal landscape for those accused of involvement in serious crimes related to national security.
Advertisement
In-Article Ad
Reader Poll
Do you believe the legal system is fair in handling cases under UAPA?
Connecting to poll...
Read the original article
Visit the source for the complete story.




