A division bench of the Supreme Court on Friday referred to a larger bench the legal questions surrounding the correctness of an earlier judgment that had denied bail to Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam in the Delhi riots case under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA).
The reference was made by a bench of Justices Aravind Kumar and PB Varale, while granting interim bail to two other accused persons, Tasleem Ahmed and Khalid Saifi, for six months on various conditions.
During the hearing, Additional Solicitor General (ASG) SV Raju urged the court to revisit a recent ruling which had held that bail should generally be the rule even in cases registered under UAPA. In that judgment, while granting bail to narco-terror accused Syed Iftikar Andrabi, a separate division bench had doubted the correctness of an earlier January decision denying bail to Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam, observing that bail should be the rule and jail the exception even in UAPA cases.
At that time, a division bench of Justices BV Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan had observed that the January judgment appeared to conflict with the principles laid down in the KA Najeeb case, which held that prolonged delays in trial could be a ground for granting bail even under UAPA, despite its stringent bail conditions.
Raju today called for a larger bench reference on these issues. He maintained that the stringent standards for bail in UAPA cases do not violate the right to liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution. He argued that all UAPA accused cannot blanketly be given the benefit of “bail not jail” principles.
The apex court has now directed that the issue be placed before the Chief Justice of India for constitution of an appropriate bench to deliver an authoritative ruling.
“It is necessary that an appropriate bench be constituted by CJI to clarify the law in KA Najeeb particularly the application of 43D(5) of UAPA (stringent tests for bail),” the Supreme Court said today, as quoted by the Bar and Bench.
Meanwhile, the Delhi High Court on Friday granted three-day interim bail to Umar Khalid to enable him to be with his mother ahead of her surgery. A bench of Justice Prathiba M. Singh and Justice Madhu Jain ordered his release on interim bail from June 1 to June 3 in view of the medical procedure.
Khalid had challenged a trial court order that rejected his interim bail plea in the UAPA case related to the alleged “larger conspiracy” behind the February 2020 northeast Delhi riots.
He had sought 15 days’ interim bail to attend a 40-day post-death ritual (Chehlum) of his uncle and to assist in his mother’s surgery. The trial court had observed that attending the ceremony of his deceased uncle was “not that necessary” and that other family members were available to take care of his mother.
Khalid has been accused of being one of the “masterminds” of the February 2020 riots, which left 53 people dead and over 700 injured. The violence had erupted during protests against the Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA), 2019, and the National Register of Citizens (NRC).
Activists Sharjeel Imam, Khalid Saifi, and former Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) councillor Tahir Hussain, among others, have also been booked in the larger conspiracy case being investigated by the Delhi Police Special Cell.