The Supreme Court has delivered a significant and split verdict in the so-called “larger conspiracy” case linked to the 2020 North-East Delhi riots. The apex court rejected the bail pleas of anti-CAA activists Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam, while granting bail to their co-accused Gulfisha Fatima, Meeran Haider, Shifa-ur-Rehman, Mohammad Salim Khan and Shadab Ahmed.
In its order, the court made it clear that the role, alleged acts and material on record against each accused must be assessed independently. According to the bench, the nature of the allegations and the prosecution’s material against Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam were found to be more serious when compared to the other accused.
With regard to the five co-accused who were granted bail, the court observed that their alleged roles appeared to be limited, and considering the present stage of the trial, they could be released on bail.
The case has been registered under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), a stringent law that prescribes strict conditions for the grant of bail. The Supreme Court reiterated that in UAPA cases, special weight is given to prima facie evidence, the gravity of the allegations and the scale of the alleged conspiracy while considering bail.
Delhi Police has maintained that a wide-ranging conspiracy was hatched in the name of protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) before and during the 2020 riots, with the intent of inciting violence. On this basis, several student activists, social activists and former public representatives were named as accused.
On the other hand, the accused persons and various human rights organisations have argued that peaceful protest and voices of dissent have been portrayed as a criminal conspiracy, amounting to a violation of democratic rights.
Notably, several accused in the case have been in judicial custody for over three to four years, while the trial is yet to be concluded. The Supreme Court’s verdict has come at a time when debates over prolonged undertrial detention and the right to bail have intensified across the country.
The accused who have been granted bail will have to comply with strict conditions laid down by the court, including cooperation with the investigation, refraining from influencing witnesses, and avoiding public statements related to the case.
Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam will remain in prison for now, though legal remedies remain open to them. Meanwhile, the relief granted to the co-accused is being viewed as a form of partial judicial balance in the case.
The verdict is once again expected to sharpen the nationwide debate on the UAPA, the right to dissent, and the functioning of the criminal justice system.
