Introduction:
A Delhi court granted interim bail to Umar Khalid, a former JNU scholar and activist, in a high-profile case under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) linked to the alleged larger conspiracy behind the 2020 North-East Delhi riots. Khalid, accused alongside individuals such as Tahir Hussain, Sharjeel Imam, and Safoora Zargar under FIR 59 of 2020 registered by Delhi Police’s Special Cell, has been in custody since his arrest in September 2020. Additional Sessions Judge Sameer Bajpai, presiding over the Karkardooma Courts, granted Khalid a 7-day interim bail to attend a family wedding, imposing strict conditions including restrictions on contacting witnesses, avoiding social media usage, and confining himself to his home or the wedding venues during the bail period.
Arguments of Both Sides:
During the hearing for interim bail, Umar Khalid’s counsel argued that attending the wedding of a close family member is a fundamental personal right that should not be denied. The defence emphasized that Khalid has always abided by the law and is not a flight risk. His counsel assured the court of Khalid’s commitment to follow any conditions imposed and argued that the request for a short interim bail of seven days would not affect the ongoing proceedings. They also highlighted that the wedding is a significant familial occasion, necessitating his presence. The defence reiterated that the interim bail was sought purely for personal reasons and that Khalid would return to custody as required.
The prosecution opposed the bail plea, citing the seriousness of the charges under the UAPA, including conspiracy and instigation of violence during the 2020 Delhi riots. They argued that Khalid’s presence outside custody could potentially influence witnesses, given the sensitive nature of the case. The prosecution expressed concern that granting interim bail, even for a short duration, might set a precedent for other accused individuals. However, the court was reassured that Khalid’s movements and compliance with conditions could be closely monitored.
Court’s Judgment:
After considering the arguments, Additional Sessions Judge Sameer Bajpai granted Umar Khalid interim bail for seven days, recognizing the significance of the occasion and his right to attend family functions. The court imposed stringent conditions to ensure no interference with the judicial process or the ongoing investigation. Khalid was directed to avoid contacting witnesses or engaging with anyone related to the case during the interim bail period. He was explicitly prohibited from using social media to prevent any communication that could impact the proceedings. Moreover, the court restricted Khalid’s movements to his home or the venues where the wedding ceremonies were scheduled to take place.
The court noted that Khalid must surrender to the concerned Jail Superintendent by the evening of January 3, 2025. While granting bail, the judge emphasized the exceptional nature of this relief, clarifying that it should not influence his pending appeal challenging the denial of regular bail. The court also observed that Khalid’s interim bail plea was distinct from the ongoing trial and unrelated to the merits of the case.
Background of the Case:
The case against Umar Khalid and other co-accused stems from the 2020 North-East Delhi riots, which resulted in significant loss of life and property. FIR 59 of 2020, filed by the Delhi Police’s Special Cell, includes charges under several sections of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967. The prosecution alleges a premeditated conspiracy behind the riots, implicating Khalid and others for instigating violence through inflammatory speeches, coordinated planning, and financial support to disrupt peace.
Earlier, Khalid’s bail plea was denied by the Delhi High Court in October 2022, where the court highlighted the gravity of the charges under UAPA and observed a prima facie case against him. His subsequent appeal before the Supreme Court was withdrawn and his second regular bail plea was rejected by the trial court earlier this year. Khalid’s appeal challenging this rejection remains pending before the Delhi high Court.