In a significant development, the Delhi Police have formally opposed the bail applications of student activists Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam, and three other individuals implicated in the conspiracy case related to the 2020 Northeast Delhi riots. Appearing before the Supreme Court, the police argued that the alleged offenses were so severe they aimed at destabilizing the state and therefore warranted “jail and not bail.”
The police presented a detailed 177-page affidavit, asserting that the violence witnessed in February 2020 was not a mere escalation of protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA). Instead, they characterized it as a meticulously planned “regime change operation” disguised as civil dissent. According to the prosecution’s claims, the objective was to incite communal tensions during the visit of then-US President Donald Trump, thereby amplifying the unrest on a global scale and portraying the Indian government in a negative light internationally.
This submission follows a recent inquiry from the Supreme Court, where a bench comprising Justices Aravind Kumar and NV Anjaria prompted the enforcement agency to consider the possibility of granting bail to the accused, several of whom have been in judicial custody for nearly five years. The court noted that “five years are over already,” signaling that prolonged pre-trial detention might warrant a reconsideration of bail, as is often the rule under ordinary criminal law, where bail is typically favored over jail.
However, under the stringent provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), courts must be satisfied that the allegations, even at a preliminary level, do not prima facie suggest involvement in terrorist activities before granting bail. The Delhi Police maintain that this threshold has not been met in the current case.
The affidavit, submitted by advocate Rajat Nair, highlighted that investigators have gathered substantial evidence, including witness testimonies, documents, and technical data, to support their assertion of a “deep-rooted conspiracy” rooted in communal divisions. The police allege that encrypted communications reveal a deliberate strategy to synchronize protests with President Trump’s visit in February 2020, aiming for maximum international attention.
To further bolster their argument of an orchestrated sequence of events, the prosecution pointed to similar incidents of unrest occurring concurrently in various states, including Uttar Pradesh, Assam, West Bengal, Karnataka, Kerala, Maharashtra, and Bihar. They presented these as evidence of a “pan-India plan” rather than isolated occurrences.
The police also accused the defendants of intentionally delaying the trial proceedings. They cited that document supply alone took 39 hearings over two years, and the framing of charges has been postponed in nearly 50 hearings. This aligns with remarks made by the Delhi High Court the previous month, which also attributed delays to the defense’s actions, a point the prosecution claims the petitioners failed to disclose to the Supreme Court.
The accused, including Khalid, Imam, Meeran Haider, Gulfisha Fatima, and Shifa-ur-Rehman, have consistently asserted their right to peaceful protest and view the “larger conspiracy” case as an attempt to criminalize dissent. They argue that prolonged incarceration without a trial constitutes punishment before conviction.
The upcoming Supreme Court hearing is anticipated to scrutinize both the issue of trial delays and the legal standards required under the UAPA, making it a crucial juncture for the case. Previously, the Delhi High Court had denied bail, describing the roles of Khalid and Imam in the alleged conspiracy as “prima facie grave” and finding evidence of a coordinated plan behind the riots that resulted in 53 deaths and hundreds of injuries. The High Court had also noted that their absence from riot sites did not absolve them, as the alleged planning predated the violence.
Represented by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta and special public prosecutor Amit Prasad, the Delhi Police have labeled the activists as the “intellectual architects” of the conspiracy. The accused maintain their innocence, emphasizing their constitutional right to protest and arguing that their extended detention amounts to punishment without trial. They have also sought parity with other student activists who were granted bail by the High Court in 2021.
Imam has been in custody since January 2020, while Khalid was arrested in September 2020. Other co-accused have been incarcerated for similar durations.