On 5 January 2026, the Supreme Court of India denied bail to Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam in the 2020 Delhi riots conspiracy case, while granting conditional bail to five other accused. The bench, comprising Justices Aravind Kumar and Prasanna B Varale, delivered the verdict after reserving its order in December 2025. The case pertains to allegations of a larger conspiracy behind the February 2020 riots in North East Delhi, which resulted in 53 deaths and hundreds of injuries.
According to The Indian Express, the Supreme Court found that Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam stood on a “higher footing in the hierarchy of participation” in the alleged conspiracy. The five others granted bail are Gulfisha Fatima, Meeran Haider, Shifa-ur-Rehman, Mohammad Salim Khan, and Shadab Ahmad. The Court emphasised that the bail petitions of each accused must be examined individually, given the differences in their alleged roles.
As reported by Bar and Bench, the bench stated, “Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam stand on a qualitatively different footing as compared to other accused.” The Court clarified that while the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) imposes strict conditions for bail, it does not exclude judicial scrutiny or mandate denial of bail by default. The Court also noted that delay in trial can trigger heightened judicial scrutiny, especially in cases involving prolonged incarceration.
This report highlighted that the Supreme Court found a prima facie case under the UAPA against Khalid and Imam. The bench observed that the gravity of allegations and the evidence presented placed them on a different footing from the other accused. The Court reiterated that bail adjudication requires an assessment of the specific role attributed to each accused and whether continued detention serves a legitimate purpose without undermining the prosecution’s case.
This article added that the Supreme Court’s decision drew a clear distinction between the roles of Khalid and Imam and those of the five co-accused who were granted bail. The Court cited the seriousness of the charges and the nature of the evidence as key factors in its decision to deny bail to the two student leaders.
“Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam stand on a qualitatively different footing as compared to other accused,” the Supreme Court bench stated, as reported in the official order.
The details of the case, as this report noted, involve allegations of a premeditated and orchestrated conspiracy to incite communal violence during protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA). The Delhi Police argued that the violence was part of a broader plan to attract international attention and project the CAA as discriminatory.
The Supreme Court’s order followed the Delhi High Court’s earlier decision on 2 September 2025, which had denied bail to nine accused, including Khalid and Imam, on the grounds that the riots were not a regular protest but a well-orchestrated conspiracy as this document revealed.
This news report said that the trial in the larger conspiracy case is ongoing, with the Supreme Court directing that proceedings continue with continuity. The Court also recorded its appreciation for the assistance provided by senior counsel and legal teams during the hearings.
“The UAPA as a special statute represents a legislative judgment as to the conditions on which bail may be granted in pre-trial stage. Delay serves as a trigger for heightened judicial scrutiny,” the bench observed in its order.
This article mentioned that both Khalid and Imam have been in custody since 2020, with the prosecution alleging their involvement as “intellectual architects” of the violence. The accused have denied the charges, maintaining that their actions were limited to peaceful protest and that evidence against them has been selectively presented.
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.