On December 9, the Apex Court bench of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and AS Oka explained that the observations made by the Delhi High Court against Sharjeel Imam in the order denying bail to Umar Khalid in the Delhi riots conspiracy case will not adversely affect Imam's case. Furthermore, the court stated: "We clarify that any observations made in respect of the role of the petitioner in the impugned order will not prejudice the petitioner in any manner".

Senior Advocate Siddharth Dave, who is representing Imam, stated that the High Court made extensive findings against him while hearing the bail application of a co-accused in the case. When the bench pointed out that the High Court had stated that the observations were preliminary in nature and would have no bearing on the trial, Dave responded that the clarification was made specifically for Umar Khalid. Imam filed the Special Leave Petition in the Supreme Court, claiming that such observations were made without providing him with an opportunity to be heard. He also claims that such observations are relevant to the merits of the criminal case in which he is also a respondent, and that he has a separate bail application pending before the High Court. As a result, Imam claims that the High Court's comments in Umar Khalid's bail order will jeopardise his bail application.

Imam filed a special leave petition seeking to have the remarks removed from the order passed by a division bench of the Delhi High Court on October 18 denying bail to Umar Khalid. Sharjeel Imam has been detained since January 2020 in connection with several cases filed in connection with an alleged inflammatory speech he delivered during anti-CAA protests. In the supplementary chargesheet filed in November 2020, he was named as an accused in the larger conspiracy case.

Case Details: 
Sharjeel Imam vs State of NCT of Delhi 
Diary No. 36787-2022