SC verdict on Sharjeel Imam, Umar Khalid case Highlights: Supreme Court pronounces judgement on bail pleas

This blog has now ended, thank you for staying with us.

The Communist Party of India (Marxist) on Monday criticised the Supreme Court's decision to deny bail to Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam, saying the continued incarceration of the two under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) for over five years without trial or conviction "violates principles of natural justice."

In a post on X, the CPI (M) said prolonged pre-trial detention undermines the constitutional right to liberty and a speedy trial, reiterating that "bail is the rule, not jail."

“This court is satisfied that the prosecution material disclosed a prima facie allegation against the appellants Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam. The statutory threshold stands attracted qua these appellants. This stage of proceedings do not justify their enlargement on bail,” Bar and Bench reported the SC as saying.

“Article 21 occupies a central space in the constitutional scheme. Pre-trial incarceration cannot be assumed to have the character of punishment. The deprivation of liberty will not be arbitrary. The UAPA as a special statute represents a legislative judgement as to the conditions on which bail may be granted in the pre-trial stage,” the SC said, according to Bar and Bench

On December 10, the top court reserved its verdict on separate pleas of the accused after hearing arguments from Solicitor General Tushar Mehta and Additional Solicitor General S V Raju, appearing for Delhi police, and senior advocates Kapil Sibal, Abhishek Singhvi, Siddhartha Dave, Salman Khurshid and Sidharth Luthra, appearing for the accused.

“Trial should proceed with continuity. We place on record appreciation for the assistance by learned senior counsel and the team of lawyers,” the court said.

The Supreme Court said the ‘trial should not be unnecessarily prolonged’. It said this while directing the trial court to ensure that the examination of protected witnesses is carried forward without any delay.

The Supreme Court said, “The grant of bail to these accused does not show a dilution of the allegations against them. They shall be released on bail subject to the following conditions (there are about 12 conditions). If conditions are violated, the trial court will be at liberty to cancel the bail after hearing the accused.”

Gulfisha Fatima, Meeran Haider, Shifa Ur Rehman, Mohd Saleem Khan, and Shadab Ahmad have been allowed to move an application for grant of bail “on completion of examination of protected witnesses or completion of one year from this order.”

Gulfisha Fatima, Meeran Haider, Shifa Ur Rehman, Mohd Saleem Khan, and Shadab Ahmad are allowed bail. “They shall be released on bail subject to the following conditions (there are about 12 conditions). If conditions are violated, the trial court will be at liberty to cancel the bail after hearing the accused,” the court said

For Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam, the court said they may be at liberty to move an application for grant of bail “on completion of examination of protected witnesses or completion of one year from this order, these appellants.”

“Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam stand on a qualitatively different footing as compared to other accused,” the Supreme Court said, as per Bar and Bench.

Article 21 requires the state to justify prolonged pre-trial custody, the Supreme Court said.

Justice Kumar reads the contours and applicability of Section 15 of the UAPA, defining a “terrorist act”, Bar and Bench reported.

The Supreme Court said in its cerdict in Monday that the delay in the trial of the Delhi riots accused serves as a “trigger for heightened judicial scrutiny.”

“Submissions were advanced on prolonged incarceration and liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution. This court is not engaged in abstract comparison between the constitution and the statute,” the Supreme Court said.

A bench comprising Justices Aravind Kumar and NV Anjaria will pronounce a judgement on the bail pleas of the Delhi riots accused.

Sharjeel Imam surrendered to Delhi police in his native village of Kako while he was live on his Facebook before surrendering, for allegedly delivering inflammatory speeches against Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA) and National Register of Citizens (NRC).

Communal riots broke out in parts of Northeast Delhi in February 2020, amid protests against the Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA). The riots, which lasted several days, led to the several deaths, along with large-scale damage to homes, shops, and places of worship.

In February, violence took place in the northeast area of Delhi between groups supporting and opposing the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), which led to the deaths of at least 53 people.

Umar Khalid, a former Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) student leader, was arrested by the special cell in connection with his alleged role in the violence which took place in North East Delhi in February 2020.

He was accused of being a "conspirator" in communal riots in Delhi in February that left over 50 people dead and thousands displaced.

He was booked under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA). He was charged with criminal conspiracy, rioting and unlawful assembly, among other things.

Ahead of the Supreme Court's verdict on the bail pleas of activists Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam, and others accused in the 2020 Delhi riots conspiracy case today, Advocate Salim Naved, lawyer of one of the accused, Gulfisha Fatima said, "Our argument has been that it has been five years since these accused have been in custody. The trial has not proceeded. And that is completely the fault of the police and the prosecution... The second point is that there is absolutely no case against any of the accused."

The Delhi Police have opposed the bail pleas and said the February 2020 riots were not spontaneous, but an “orchestrated, pre-planned and well-designed” attack on India's sovereignty.

The Delhi Police, according to PTI, alleged that issue of the Citizenship Amendment Act of 2019 (CAA) was carefully chosen to serve as a "radicalising catalyst" camouflaged in the name of "peaceful protest", it had said.

The Delhi Police told the court that a conspiracy was allegedly orchestrated to coincide with the official visit of the then US President to India, with the intention of drawing international media attention and globalising the issue of the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA).

The Delhi Police reportedly objected to the bail pleas, saying the alleged offences involved a deliberate attempt to destabilise the state.

Police argued that these were not spontaneous protests but a well-orchestrated "pan-India" conspiracy aiming at "regime change" and "economic strangulation".

During the hearing of their pleas seeking bail, the advocates who appeared for the accused mostly argued on the delay and the unlikelihood of the commencement of the trial, news agency PTI reported.

It was also stated to the court that they have been under custody for over five years in a case in which they are facing serious allegations of committing offences under the UAPA.

The contentions were also made that there is no proof of violence that they instigated the riots, even after five years have passed.

The Supreme Court will pronounce its verdict on the bail pleas of Sharjeel Imam, Umar Khalid and several others on Monday.

They have challenged the Delhi High Court order denying them bail in a case under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) linked to the alleged larger conspiracy behind the 2020 north-east Delhi riots.