A Delhi court on Friday issued notice to the Delhi Police in fresh bail applications filed by Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam, seeking bail in the Delhi riots larger conspiracy case.
Additional sessions judge Sumedh Kumar Sethi of Karkardooma courts listed the hearing of arguments for July 4.
Both Khalid and Imam, in their bail applications, have cited a change in circumstances, highlighting the judgment pronounced on May 18 by a Supreme Court bench of justices BV Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan while granting bail to Jammu and Kashmir resident Syed Iftikhar Andrabi in a narco-terror case being investigated by the National Investigation Agency (NIA). The apex court had expressed “serious reservations” about the reasoning adopted earlier this year in the January 5 verdict, stating that it failed to correctly apply the binding principles laid down by a larger three-judge bench in Union of India Vs KA Najeeb (2021), which recognised that prolonged incarceration and delay in trial can override the statutory restrictions on bail under Section 43D(5) of the UAPA. The court also took exception to the direction that Khalid and Imam could revive their plea for bail only after examination of protected witnesses or after one year, whichever was earlier.
In his bail plea, Imam said, “The applicant has been in custody for approaching six years. The trial has not progressed even to framing of charge. The prosecution proposes to examine more than 900 witnesses. On the undisputed facts, KA Najeeb properly applied as declared binding by Syed Iftikhar Andrabi applies with full force to the applicant’s case”. Khalid, in his plea, said, “It is pertinent to mention that the applicant, 38, who is a researcher and scholar, was arbitrarily arrested in the impugned FIR on September 13 and has spent over 5 years and 9 months in custody as on the date of filing the present application. As such, the increased period of incarceration constitutes a further change in circumstances entitling the applicant to bail”.
{{/usCountry}}In his bail plea, Imam said, “The applicant has been in custody for approaching six years. The trial has not progressed even to framing of charge. The prosecution proposes to examine more than 900 witnesses. On the undisputed facts, KA Najeeb properly applied as declared binding by Syed Iftikhar Andrabi applies with full force to the applicant’s case”. Khalid, in his plea, said, “It is pertinent to mention that the applicant, 38, who is a researcher and scholar, was arbitrarily arrested in the impugned FIR on September 13 and has spent over 5 years and 9 months in custody as on the date of filing the present application. As such, the increased period of incarceration constitutes a further change in circumstances entitling the applicant to bail”.
{{/usCountry}}To be sure, the court on January 5 rejected the bail pleas of Khalid and Imam, while granting relief to five co-accused.
The bench of justices Kumar and Anjaria held that Khalid and Imam occupied a “central and formative role” in the alleged conspiracy behind the February 2020 northeast Delhi riots, and ruled that prolonged incarceration alone could not justify bail in UAPA cases. The judgment also relied upon the Supreme Court’s 2019 ruling in NIA Vs Zahoor Ahmad Shah Watali, which significantly tightened bail standards under UAPA.