The Delhi Police on Monday (November 18) informed the Supreme Court that activist Umar Khalid cannot rely on the bail granted to co-accused Devangana Kalita, Natasha Narwal, and Asif Iqbal Tanha in the Delhi riots larger conspiracy case. According to the Police, the 2021 Delhi High Court order granting bail to the trio was based on an “erroneous” interpretation of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA).

 

Appearing for the Police, Additional Solicitor General (ASG) SV Raju argued that the High Court had incorrectly restricted UAPA’s scope only to acts relating to the “defence of India,” and therefore wrongly held that the embargo on bail under Section 43D(5) was not applicable. As a result, the Court proceeded under Section 439 of the CrPC instead of Section 437, which governs offences punishable with death, life imprisonment, or up to seven years.

 

Raju submitted that the Supreme Court, while refusing to cancel the bail of the three activists earlier, had clearly indicated that the order could not be treated as a precedent for other accused. He emphasized that the principle of parity does not apply where bail has been granted based on an incorrect understanding of the law.

 

‘No Change in Circumstances’ to Justify Fresh Bail Plea

 

Highlighting procedural limitations, the ASG said Khalid’s earlier regular bail plea was rejected by the Delhi High Court in October 2022. His subsequent SLP before the Supreme Court was withdrawn in February 2024. He argued that, absent any “change in circumstance,” Khalid cannot file a successive bail plea solely on the ground of delay.

 

He noted, “Successive bail pleas are permissible, but they must be based on new or altered circumstances. Here, none exist. On the issue of parity as well, nothing has changed.”

 

A bench comprising Justice Aravind Kumar and Justice NV Anjaria is hearing a cluster of bail petitions arising from FIR 59/2020. When the bench asked how the Police justified different outcomes for accused in the same FIR, Raju responded that the High Court’s 2021 order was not a factual finding but a flawed declaration of law, which the Supreme Court had already disagreed with.

 

‘Not a Spontaneous Riot, But a Structured Conspiracy’: SG Tushar Mehta

 

Before Raju’s submissions, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta addressed the bench, asserting that the evidence shows a carefully orchestrated plan rather than a sudden communal outburst.

 

He stated, “This was not a spontaneous reaction to an incident. It was a meticulously designed, coordinated, and pre-planned conspiracy aimed at destabilizing the sovereignty of the nation. Speech after speech, message after message reveals a conscious attempt to polarize and divide society.”

 

Citing statements attributed to accused Sharjeel Imam, Mehta argued that the alleged intent extended beyond protests in Delhi, claiming that the plan envisioned disruption across cities with significant Muslim populations. He referred to alleged remarks about shutting down the Northeast and blocking essential supplies, underscoring that the narrative of “mere protest” was misleading.

 

Mehta also highlighted that accused persons had opposed the framing of charges for weeks or even months, signalling a strategic pattern preceding bail requests after prolonged incarceration.

 

Umar Khalid, Gulfisha Fatima, Sharjeel Imam, Meeran Haider, Shifa-Ur-Rehman, Mohd. Saleem Khan, and Shadab Ahmed have concluded their submissions on bail in the Supreme Court.

 

The petitioners, all student leaders or activists linked with the anti-CAA protests of 2019–2020, face charges under the UAPA and IPC for allegedly planning the “larger conspiracy” behind the communal violence of February 2020 in Delhi.

 

The FIR includes:

Tahir Hussain, Umar Khalid, Khalid Saifi, Ishrat Jahan, Meeran Haider, Gulfisha Fatima, Shifa-Ur-Rehman, Asif Iqbal Tanha (granted bail in 2021), Shadab Ahmed, Tasleem Ahmed, Saleem Malik, Mohd. Saleem Khan, Athar Khan, Safoora Zargar (granted bail on humanitarian grounds during pregnancy), Sharjeel Imam, Faizan Khan, Devangana Kalita (granted bail), and Natasha Narwal (granted bail).

 

The judgments dated September 2 denied bail to several key accused, including Khalid, Imam, Athar Khan, Saifi, and others. Many have spent more than five years in custody.