Bail Applications in the Delhi Riots ‘Larger Conspiracy’ Case | Judgement Matrix

On 5 January, a Bench of Justices Aravind Kumar and N.V. Anjaria decided a batch of bail pleas filed by individuals accused of terrorist acts and conspiracy in the February 2020 Delhi riots. The Court denied bail to Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam stating that they had a bigger involvement in the ‘conspiracy’. It granted bail to Gulfisha Fatima, Meeran Haider, Shifa-ur-Rehman, Mohd. Saleem Khan and Shadab Ahmed, subject to stringent conditions.

The Bench addressed the arguments on delay and prolonged incarceration, the scope of judicial inquiry at the bail stage under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (UAPA), the meaning of “prima facie true” and the constitution of a “terrorist act” under Sections 43D(5) and 15 of the UAPA, respectively. The Court noted that bail under UAPA requires an accused-specific assessment and that all accused do not stand on the same footing. Distinguishing between alleged prime conspirators and other accused, the Court held that Khalid and Imam stand on a qualitatively different footing from the remaining accused.

This judgement matrix sets out the principal legal questions considered by the Bench. For the complete reasoning and analysis, refer to our detailed judgement summary.