Delhi HC seeks police response on Sharjeel Imam's bail plea in 2020 riots conspiracy case

The Delhi High Court on Friday sought the response of Delhi Police on a bail plea filed by student activist Sharjeel Imam in the alleged "larger conspiracy" case linked to the February 2020 northeast Delhi riots, in which he is charged under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA).

A division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Vikas Mahajan issued notice on Imam's appeal challenging a July 4 trial court order that dismissed his second application for regular bail. The bench granted Delhi Police two weeks to file its reply and posted the matter for hearing on August 27.

Also Read: 2020 Delhi riots: Court reserves order on bail of student activists Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam


Imam was arrested on August 25, 2020, and has been accused of being one of the "masterminds" behind the February 2020 communal violence in northeast Delhi. The riots, which broke out during protests against the Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA), 2019, and the proposed National Register of Citizens (NRC), left 53 people dead and more than 700 injured.

The trial court had rejected Imam's bail plea, saying it had "no option but to follow" the Supreme Court's January 5 order and therefore could neither entertain the application nor grant him relief. It held that the bail plea was not maintainable before it.

Also Read: 2020 Delhi riots: Court denies bail to student activists Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam in larger-conspiracy case

In his appeal before the High Court, Imam argued that the trial court had erred by refusing to independently assess his request for regular bail. He also contended that despite six years having elapsed since the case was registered, the proceedings had not progressed beyond the stage of arguments on charge.

On January 5, the Supreme Court refused bail to Imam and co-accused Umar Khalid in the larger conspiracy case while granting relief to co-accused Gulfisha Fatima, Meeran Haider, Shifa Ur Rehman, Mohammad Saleem Khan and Shadab Ahmad.

At the time, a bench of Justices Aravind Kumar and N.V. Anjaria observed that there was a prima facie case against Khalid and Imam under the UAPA. The court further held that all accused could not be treated alike, citing the "hierarchy of participation" in the alleged conspiracy.