Since his arrest by the Delhi Police on September 13, 2020, in connection to the Delhi riots, Umar Khalid has remained in custody.
Umar Khalid on Wednesday withdrew his bail application from the Supreme Court in connection with a case filed under the anti-terrorism law, UAPA. The Supreme Court granted student activist Umar Khalid permission to withdraw his bail plea following his disclosure that he intends to pursue bail once more through the trial court. Former Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) student stands accused under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA) for his alleged role in the 2020 Delhi riots.
The bench, comprising Justices Bela M Trivedi and Pankaj Mithal, allowed Khalid”s request to withdraw the bail plea.
Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, representing Khalid, said, “There has been a change in circumstances. We will try our luck again before the trial court. We wish to withdraw the bail matter.”
However, Sibal did not elaborate on the “change in circumstances”.
Khalid has also filed a writ petition challenging constitutional validity of the provisions of UAPA, including Section 43D placing stringent conditions for bail, which was also listed on Wednesday before the same bench.
“We will argue the legal question that we have raised in the writ petition,” Sibal added.
Khalid had approached the top court in April last year following the Delhi High Court”s refusal to grant him bail. The bench recorded the statement made by Khalid”s counsel and sanctioned the withdrawal of the appeal contesting the dismissal of his bail plea by the Delhi High Court on October 18, 2022.
Since his arrest by the Delhi Police on September 13, 2020, in connection to the Delhi riots, Khalid has remained in custody. The Delhi Police, in their response to Khalid”s bail plea in the Supreme Court, accused him of being the alleged “mastermind” behind the February 2020 riots in northeast Delhi.
The eruption of violence during the protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) claimed 53 lives and left over 700 injured. Khalid, along with Sharjeel Imam and several others, faces charges under the UAPA and various provisions of the Indian Penal Code, accused of being the architects of the riots.
Khalid refutes any criminal involvement in the violence or any conspiratorial association with other suspects in the case. The Delhi Police countered Khalid”s bail plea in the high court, alleging that his speeches were strategically crafted, touching upon contentious topics such as Babri Masjid, triple talaq, Kashmir, alleged Muslim suppression, and the CAA and NRC.
The high court while refusing bail found the allegations against Khalid to be prima facie true, a sufficient condition under section 43D of UAPA to refuse bail. Khalid sought bail citing the failure of the police to show any recovery from him to substantiate the charges under UAPA. He also pointed out the material inconsistencies in the evidence relied upon by the police to incriminate him.
