The Supreme Court on Monday, January 5, denied bail to activists Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam in the 2020 Delhi riots conspiracy case. A bench of Justices Aravind Kumar and NV Anjaria, consider of national security and public order outweigh claims of prolonged incarceration at the pre-trial stage.
However, the apex court granted bail to five others accused named in the case are Gulfisha Fatima, Meeran Haider, Shifa Ur Rehman, Mohd Saleem Khan, and Shadab Ahmed. While turning down bail requests of Khalid and Imam.
Also Read | Delhi riots case: SC denies bail to Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam; grants relief to 5 others.
The Supreme Court said the prosecution had placed sufficient material on record pointing to their role in the alleged criminal conspiracy. "This court is satisfied that the prosecution material disclosed a prima facie allegation against the appellants Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam. The statutory threshold stands attracted qua these appellants. This stage of proceedings does not justify their enlargement on bail," the bench said, reported India Today.
On December 10, the top court reserved its verdict on the separate pleas of the accused challenging the Delhi High Court's September 2 ruling that refused relief to the accused in the conspiracy case.
Former Union Minister for Law and Justice Ashwani Kumar said, "Obviously they have made a distinction and obviously they they feel that they are different grounds because they have granted bail to some and Not granted bail to others. So obviously They must have found Differences this this can be commented upon only after a detailed study of the judgment"
"The libertarians in this country today would be unhappy. The constitution's conscience is libertarian, and bail is the rule and jail is an exception is a well-established principle of criminal jurisprudence. However, having said that, if the Honorable Supreme Court has decided to make a distinction between the accused, it has granted bail to some and not granted bail to the two principal accused, I assume there must be strong reasons for that. But on a general basis, if you ask me, such a long incarceration without conviction does not comport with the conscience of the constitution," Kumar told IANS.