The Delhi High Court on September 30 dismissed the regular bail appeals of Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam in the case concerning the alleged larger conspiracy behind the February 2020 North-East Delhi riots. The Division Bench of Justice Prathiba M. Singh and Justice Dinesh Bhatt held that it could not alter the specific conditions attached to their bail pleas by the Supreme Court in its January 2026 judgment.
Background
The appeals arose from the July 4, 2026 order of the Special NIA Court, which rejected the regular bail applications of Khalid and Imam. The proceedings relate to FIR No. 59/2020, registered by the Delhi Police Special Cell in connection with allegations concerning a larger conspiracy behind the 2020 violence.
In January 2026, the Supreme Court had declined bail to Khalid and Imam while granting bail to several other accused. In relation to Khalid and Imam, the Supreme Court permitted them to renew their bail requests upon the examination of protected witnesses or after the expiry of one year from its January 5, 2026 order, whichever was earlier.
Before the High Court, the appellants relied on developments they argued amounted to a change in circumstances. These included subsequent Supreme Court proceedings concerning prolonged incarceration under the UAPA, interim bail granted to co-accused Tasleem Ahmed and Khalid Saifi, and the further period spent in custody after the January judgment.
The defence also relied on the delay in the trial. Senior Advocate Trideep Pais, appearing for Umar Khalid, argued that the proceedings were unlikely to conclude soon. Advocate Talib Mustafa represented Sharjeel Imam. The prosecution was represented by Additional Solicitor General S.V. Raju.
The prosecution opposed the pleas, maintaining that the roles attributed to Khalid and Imam were distinct from those of the accused who had subsequently received interim bail.
The High Court examined whether the subsequent developments allowed it to reconsider the specific liberty granted by the Supreme Court. It held that the answer was no, particularly because the conditions imposed in the Supreme Court's January order had not been satisfied.
The Bench also considered the reliance placed on later Supreme Court decisions and the interim bail orders concerning other accused. It found that those proceedings could not be used to modify the specific directions applicable to Khalid and Imam.
The Court observed:
“In view of the above discussion and the overall facts of these cases, specifically the conditions imposed by the Supreme Court in Gulfisha Fatima, this court cannot find fault with the order passed by the trial court. The present appeals are therefore dismissed.”
The Court also noted that the roles attributed to Tasleem Ahmed and Khalid Saifi were different, and therefore their interim bail orders did not establish a basis for parity with Khalid and Imam.
The Delhi High Court accordingly dismissed the bail appeals filed by Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam, upholding the trial court's July 4, 2026 decision refusing them regular bail.
