Delhi Riots Case: SC Denies Bail to Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam; 5 Others Freed

New Delhi, january 05, 2026: In a significant development in the 2020 North East Delhi riots “larger conspiracy” case, the Supreme Court of India on Monday, January 5, 2026, delivered a mixed verdict on the bail applications of several high-profile activists.

A Bench comprising Justices Aravind Kumar and N.V. Anjaria denied bail to former JNU students Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam, while granting relief to five other co-accused who have been in custody for nearly six years.

The Verdict: Differentiation of Roles

The apex court’s decision hinged on the “qualitative difference” in the roles attributed to the accused by the prosecution. While the court acknowledged the long period of incarceration, it maintained that the allegations against Khalid and Imam attracted the stringent “statutory threshold” of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA).

Why Bail was Denied to Khalid and Imam

The Bench observed that the material presented by the Delhi Police prima facie suggested a central role for Khalid and Imam in orchestrating the protests that allegedly led to the communal violence.

• Qualitative Footing: The court stated that these two appellants stood on a “different footing” compared to others, as they were allegedly the masterminds behind the “chakka jam” (road blockades) designed to disrupt the capital.
• Future Recourse: In a small window of relief, the court clarified that both activists would be at liberty to move fresh bail applications after the examination of protected witnesses is completed, or after one year from today, whichever is earlier.

Relief for Five Others

In contrast, the Supreme Court granted bail to five other individuals, noting that their roles were more “facilitatory” rather than central. The individuals granted bail are:

1. Gulfisha Fatima
2. Meeran Haider
3. Shifa-ur-Rehman
4. Mohd. Saleem Khan
5. Shadab Ahmad

The court reasoned that treating all accused with a “collective or unified approach” would be arbitrary. These five individuals were ordered to be released subject to strict conditions, including the surrender of passports and regular reporting to the police.

Balancing UAPA and Article 2

The judgment touched upon the delicate balance between national security laws and the Right to Liberty under Article 21. The Bench remarked that while the UAPA is a special statute with strict bail conditions, “prolonged delay in trial can serve as a trigger for judicial scrutiny.”

The court directed the trial court to ensure that the examination of protected witnesses is carried out without any further delay to prevent the trial from becoming “unnecessarily prolonged.”

Background of the Case

The case pertains to the communal riots that broke out in February 2020 in North East Delhi during the anti-CAA protests. The violence resulted in 53 deaths and left hundreds injured. The Delhi Police’s Special Cell filed a “larger conspiracy” case (FIR 59/2020), alleging that the riots were a pre-planned attempt to destabilize the government.

Most of the accused have been in jail since mid-2020. Today’s verdict marks one of the most significant legal turning points in the case, finally providing a path to freedom for some while extending the legal battle for those the state considers the primary architects of the unrest.