Tasleem Ahmed, an accused in the 2020 Delhi riots larger conspiracy case, has moved the Supreme Court seeking bail after the Delhi High Court denied his request. The Supreme Court, on 11 February 2026, issued notice to the Delhi Police, asking for their response to Ahmed’s plea. The case involves multiple charges under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act and the Indian Penal Code, with Ahmed having spent over four years in custody.
According to Live Law, Ahmed’s special leave petition challenges the Delhi High Court’s order dated 2 September 2025, which upheld the trial court’s decision to deny him regular bail for the third time. The Supreme Court bench, comprising Justice Aravind Kumar and Justice PB Varale, has sought a reply from the Delhi Police regarding the matter.
As reported by Deccan Herald, the Delhi High Court had previously dismissed Ahmed’s bail plea, stating that delay in trial alone could not be the sole ground for granting bail. The High Court observed that only in cases of clear violation of fundamental or constitutional rights could prolonged incarceration justify bail, and noted that some accused who had secured bail were delaying arguments, affecting those still in custody.
Ahmed was arrested in connection with FIR No. 59/2020, which includes charges under several sections of the UAPA, IPC, Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, and the Arms Act. Details provided indicate that Ahmed had previously sought bail on grounds of parity with co-accused who were granted bail by the Delhi High Court in 2021. However, the Supreme Court clarified that those bail orders could not serve as precedent for other accused due to differing interpretations of UAPA provisions.
Ahmed’s legal team has argued that he has now spent more than four years in custody, and there has been no significant progress in the trial. Court proceedings have highlighted the issue of prolonged incarceration, with the High Court questioning the Delhi Police on the duration for which an accused can be kept in jail without trial advancement. Ahmed is also on regular bail in another related FIR.
“The High Court on September 2 last year had dismissed Ahmed's bail plea, saying ‘delay in trial’ cannot be the sole ground for consideration,”
Ahmed’s counsel has cited the Supreme Court’s earlier observation that parity could be considered, but it was for the petitioner to make out a case. Submissions before the bench included references to the lack of progress in the trial and the extended period of pre-trial detention.
The Supreme Court’s notice to the Delhi Police marks the next procedural step, with the matter now pending further submissions and a detailed response from the authorities. The case continues to draw attention due to the broader context of the 2020 Delhi riots and the application of stringent anti-terror laws.
Note: This article is produced using AI-assisted tools and is based on publicly available information. It has been reviewed by The Quint's editorial team before publishing.