Umar Khalid moves High Court against bail rejection in 2020 North-East Delhi riots case

Activist and former Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) student leader Umar Khalid has approached the Delhi High Court to challenge the rejection of his regular bail application in a case linked to the 2020 North-East Delhi riots. The case falls under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), alleging involvement in a broader conspiracy surrounding the violence. Khalid’s appeal is scheduled for hearing this Friday before a Division Bench comprising Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Vikas Mahajan. The appeal challenges the July 4 decision of the Karkardooma Court, which denied Khalid’s request for regular bail. In his submission, Khalid argues that over six months have elapsed since the Supreme Court turned down his previous bail plea on January 5, with no substantial progress made in the trial. He highlighted that the trial remains at the preliminary stage, with ongoing arguments regarding the framing of charges. Additionally, Khalid has been in custody since September 2020. Khalid’s plea also includes a request for interim bail pending the resolution of a critical legal question before the Supreme Court. This issue concerns whether extended detention and delays in the trial could serve as valid grounds for granting bail, even under the constraints imposed by the UAPA. The Supreme Court has referred the matter to a larger bench following divergent rulings from two separate benches. On July 4, Additional Sessions Judge Sameer Bajpai of the Karkardooma Court dismissed the regular bail applications of both Khalid and co-accused Sharjeel Imam. The court stated that it was bound by the Supreme Court’s January 5 ruling, which had previously rejected their bail petitions. According to the court, the applicants could only reapply for bail after either the prosecution’s protected witnesses had been examined or one year had passed, whichever came first. Neither condition had been met, leading the court to conclude that the new bail requests were not admissible. The prosecution opposed the bail applications, asserting that there had been no notable shift in circumstances since the Supreme Court’s earlier decision. They also noted that Khalid’s review petition had already been dismissed by the Supreme Court. The case pertains to the alleged mastermind behind the 2020 North-East Delhi riots. Despite the passage of time, the trial remains in its initial phase, with charges yet to be formally framed. The legal proceedings have drawn attention due to the high-profile nature of the accused and the complex legal issues surrounding the UAPA provisions. Khalid has previously spoken about his experience of being detained for nearly six years without a trial, describing humanity as a privilege rather than a right granted to individuals in his situation. His current legal strategy focuses on leveraging the ongoing Supreme Court deliberation on the bail issue to secure temporary release. The outcome of Khalid’s appeal will depend largely on the Supreme Court’s resolution of the legal question regarding bail eligibility under the UAPA. Until then, his continued detention hinges on the interpretation of existing judicial precedents and the procedural timelines set by lower courts. The Delhi High Court’s decision on his interim bail request could provide clarity on the immediate future of his legal status.