Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam petition Supreme Court for bail over trial delays

UPDATE - follow-up to Sharjeel Imam moves Supreme Court seeking bail in UAPA case over 2020 Delhi riots: Activists Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam have approached the Supreme Court to challenge a September 30 order by the Delhi High Court that rejected their bail applications in the larger conspiracy case connected to the February 2020 Delhi riots. Both petitioners argue that staying in prison for over six years while the trial has not even started breaks the right to personal liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution.

Background

On January 5, a Supreme Court bench consisting of Justices Aravind Kumar and N.V. Anjaria refused bail to the two men, calling them the main ideological planners of the alleged conspiracy and keeping them in a different category from other accused individuals. While five co-accused—Gulfisha Fatima, Meeran Haider, Shifa ur Rehman, Mohd. Saleem Khan, and Shadab Ahmed—received bail with strict conditions, the court told Khalid and Imam they could apply again only after the examination of protected witnesses or after one full year passed, whichever happened first. Their subsequent approach to the Delhi High Court on September 30 was dismissed by Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Dinesh Bhatt, who stated that judicial rules stopped them from changing the top court's conditions.

Legal Arguments

In their new petitions filed through advocates N. Sai Vinod and Fauzia Shakil, the two men note that the prosecution has listed over 900 witnesses, including 47 protected witnesses, but not a single witness has been examined so far. They point out that arguments on framing charges finished on July 13, but the trial has stalled because the trial judge is waiting for a Supreme Court verdict regarding the inspection of unrelied documents. Because of this standstill, they argue that examining the protected witnesses will not finish before the one-year court deadline ends, making their continued detention punitive rather than part of regular legal procedure.

Context

The Unlawful Activities Prevention Act is a stringent counter-terrorism law in India that places heavy restrictions on granting bail to accused individuals. Under this legal framework, courts often face complex challenges in balancing individual liberty against national security during prolonged pre-trial detentions.