Delhi HC Asks Police to Reply on Umar Khalid's Third Bail Plea in 2020 Riots Case

The Delhi High Court on Friday sought a response from the Delhi Police on a plea filed by activist Umar Khalid seeking bail in the case related to the alleged “larger conspiracy” behind the February 2020 north-east Delhi riots. A Bench of Justice Prathiba M. Singh and Justice Vikas Mahajan directed the police to file their response within two weeks.

Khalid, who has been in custody since September 2020, told the court that this was his third bail application. He argued that he was entitled to interim bail on the same grounds that the Supreme Court had previously granted to other co-accused in the case. The Bench scheduled the next hearing for August 27, when the bail plea of co-accused Sharjeel Imam is also listed for consideration.

The development comes after a trial court on July 4 rejected Khalid's bail application. In that order, the trial court said it had “no option but to follow” the Supreme Court's January 5 decision, which had dismissed Khalid's earlier plea for relief. The trial court observed that it could neither entertain the request nor grant relief in light of the apex court's order.

Khalid has now challenged the trial court's July 4 ruling before the High Court. Additional Solicitor General S.V. Raju, representing the Delhi Police, informed the Bench that the same trial court order had also rejected Imam's bail plea. He suggested that both matters could be taken up together, given that they arise from the same order.

Khalid is among several activists and political figures booked under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) in connection with the violence that erupted in north-east Delhi in February 2020. The riots, which occurred amid protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act, left 53 people dead and over 700 injured. The police have described Khalid as one of the “masterminds” behind the unrest, though he has consistently denied the allegations.

Others named in the larger conspiracy case include Sharjeel Imam, Khalid Saifi, and former Aam Aadmi Party councillor Tahir Hussain. The case is being investigated by the Delhi Police's Special Cell, which has invoked the stringent UAPA provisions against the accused.

Khalid's legal team has maintained that his continued detention is unjustified, pointing to the Supreme Court's grant of bail to some co-accused. The High Court will now consider whether the similarities in the cases warrant similar relief for Khalid, while also weighing the police's objections.

This is the third time Khalid has approached a court for bail since his arrest. Earlier attempts were rejected, with courts citing the seriousness of the charges and the stage of the investigation. However, his lawyers argue that the trial has yet to commence, and that prolonged pre-trial detention violates his fundamental rights under Article 21 of the Constitution.

The upcoming hearing on August 27 will be crucial, as the Bench is expected to examine the trial court's reasoning and the Supreme Court's earlier observations. Legal observers note that the outcome could have implications for other accused in the same case, as well as for the broader interpretation of bail jurisprudence under UAPA.

Meanwhile, civil rights groups have called for a fair and speedy trial, while stressing the presumption of innocence until guilt is proven. The case continues to draw public attention amid debates over the use of anti-terror laws in politically sensitive prosecutions.