SC slams Delhi Police for not replying to Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam bail pleas

The Supreme Court on Monday, 27 October, refused to grant Delhi Police additional time to file counter-affidavits in connection with bail pleas filed by several accused in the Delhi riots “larger conspiracy” case, observing that sufficient time had already been given.

A bench comprising justice Aravind Kumar and justice N.V. Anjaria rejected the police’s request for a two-week extension and instead directed that the counter-affidavit be filed before the next hearing, scheduled for Friday.

LiveLaw reported that at the outset, additional solicitor general (ASG) S.V. Raju, appearing for the Delhi Police, sought more time to file the response. The bench, however, noted that it had previously set clear timelines for the case. “We have given you enough time. You may be appearing for the first time, but last time we said we will hear the matter on October 27 and dispose of it,” Justice Kumar remarked.

Questioning the need for further delay, Justice Kumar asked, “What is the question of a counter-affidavit in a bail matter?” When the ASG sought two weeks to file the response, the bench replied, “You file the counter, but we will not give you two weeks.” Even a request for one week was declined.

Senior advocates Kapil Sibal and A.M. Singhvi, representing the petitioners, highlighted the prolonged incarceration of their clients. “They have been behind bars for over five years,” Sibal noted, while Singhvi added that the issue at hand was the delay in trial proceedings, which should not be compounded by further postponements.

Justice Kumar observed, “After all, it is a matter of bail… five years they have completed.” The bench also urged the prosecution to consider the broader implications of continued detention. “See also, Mr Raju, examine if you can think of coming out with something,” Justice Kumar said, hinting at the possibility of considering bail on grounds of delay.

The case concerns student activists Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam, Meeran Haider, Gulfisha Fatima, and Shifa-ur-Rehman, who were among those accused of orchestrating a “larger conspiracy” behind the communal violence in Delhi in February 2020. The accused have been charged under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) and the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

Their petitions challenge the Delhi High Court’s 2 September judgment, which denied them bail in FIR 59 of 2020 registered by the Delhi Police’s Special Cell. The High Court bench of Justice Naveen Chawla and Justice Shalinder Kaur had dismissed their applications, citing the gravity of the allegations.

The matter first came before the Supreme Court on 12 September but was deferred as the bench received the case files late. On 19 September, Justice Kumar and Justice Manmohan were scheduled to hear it, but Justice Manmohan recused himself due to a prior professional association with Kapil Sibal. The bench later issued notice on 22 September and fixed the hearing for 27 October.

The accused in the broader conspiracy case include Tahir Hussain, Umar Khalid, Khalid Saifi, Ishrat Jahan, Meeran Haider, Gulfisha Fatima, Shifa-ur-Rehman, Sharjeel Imam, and several others. Some, including Devangana Kalita, Natasha Narwal, and Asif Iqbal Tanha, have already been granted bail.

The bench’s decision to press ahead with Friday’s hearing now sets the stage for a crucial development in one of the most closely watched cases arising from the 2020 Delhi riots.

With agency inputs