Read Time: 05 minutes

Synopsis

A Delhi Court on Wednesday called upon the Delhi Police to respond to the bail petition filed by UAPA accused Umar Khalid in connection with the case involving communal clashes that broke out in northeast Delhi in February 2020, after violence between Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019 supporters and protesters.

Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) Sameer Bajpai of Karkardooma Court was hearing Khalid’s recent application for regular bail. Khalid has been charged under the stringent Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) in connection with the riots.

The court directed the prosecution to furnish a reply to Khalid’s bail application on the next hearing date, scheduled for March 11.

The judge also directed that a copy of the bail application and accompanying documents have already been provided to the prosecution, emphasizing the need for a timely response.

“Copy of the bail application along with documents has already been supplied to the prosecution. Reply to the present bail application be filed by the prosecution on the next date, with advance copy to the counsel for the applicant or accused (Khalid),” the court said in its order dated February 28.

The case involves a total of twenty individuals, including activists Sharjeel Imam, Khalid Saifi, and former Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) councillor Tahir Hussain, who are implicated in the alleged conspiracy to instigate the communal riots. The Special Cell of the Delhi Police is conducting an investigation into the case.

Khalid has moved the trial court after he withdrew his bail application filed before the Supreme Court of India.

Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Khalid had told the bench that the bail plea was being withdrawn owing to 'changed circumstances'.

Background:

On September 13, 2020, Umar Khalid was arrested in connection with communal clashes that broke out in northeast Delhi in February 2020, after violence between Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019 supporters, and its protesters became out of control, leaving many people dead and several injured.

Earlier, while denying Khalid bail, ASJ Amitabh Rawat of Karkardooma Court found that Khalid's name was a "recurring mention" from the beginning of the conspiracy till the riots & that there were numerous statements of witnesses (recorded before the magistrate and before the police) highlighting "incriminating material" against Khalid.

Khalid challenged the said order before the Delhi High Court on the ground that there was no evidence linking him to the violence that erupted in Delhi during the riots. The high court, however, also denied bail to Khalid.

Case Title: State v. Tahir Hussain & Others (Umar Khalid)