Umar Khalid, accused of conspiracy in 2020 Delhi riots, withdrew his bail plea from the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court on Wednesday (14 February) rejected the bail plea of former JNU student Umar Khalid in the case of major conspiracy of Delhi riots, considering it withdrawn. Umar Khalid has taken the bail petition from the Supreme Court.

Former JNU student Khalid’s lawyer Kapil Sibal told the Supreme Court that he will try for bail again in the lower court. Earlier, Delhi High Court had refused to grant bail to Khalid, terming the allegations against him as serious.

What did Kapil Sibal say in the court?

Senior lawyer Kapil Sibal said, “We want to withdraw the bail case. Circumstances have changed, we will try our luck in the trial court.” The bench of Justice Bela Trivedi and Justice Pankaj Mithal considered the petition as withdrawn. However, Kapil Sibal made it clear that he would argue on a separate writ petition filed by Khalid, in which the constitutionality of the provisions of UAPA has been challenged.

Umar Khalid in jail since 2020

Umar Khalid has been behind bars since September 2020 and has been prosecuted under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act for his alleged involvement in a larger conspiracy in the February 2020 communal violence in Delhi.

Khalid had challenged the order of October 18, 2022 of the Delhi High Court in which his bail application was rejected. The High Court had rejected Khalid’s bail plea saying that he was in constant touch with other co-accused and the allegations against him were prima facie true. The court had also said that the actions of the accused were “terrorist acts” under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA).

53 people died in Delhi riots

Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam and several others were booked under UAPA and several provisions of the Indian Penal Code for conspiring in the February 2020 riots. 53 people were killed and more than 700 people were injured in these riots. Umar Khalid was arrested by Delhi Police in September 2020 and has sought bail on the grounds that he neither had any criminal role in the violence nor had he conspired with other accused in the case.