Supreme Court Postpones Hearing in Umar Khalid’s Delhi Riots ‘Larger Conspiracy’ Case
The Supreme Court has deferred the hearing of Umar Khalid’s plea in the 2020 North-East Delhi communal riots case, often referred to as the ‘larger conspiracy’ case. The bench, consisting of Justices Aniruddha Bose and Bela Trivedi, was reviewing Khalid’s special leave petition that challenged the Delhi High Court’s decision to deny him bail last year.
At the beginning of the hearing, the bench communicated to Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, who represents Khalid, that they would need to thoroughly examine the evidence on record. Justice Bose stated,
“We will grant leave and fix it after two to three weeks. You file something on what is the evidence available insofar as offences under Chapters 4 and 6 [of the UAPA] are concerned, and how according to you, it’s not matching…Now chargesheet has been submitted. We will have to match the ingredients of the offences with the charges.“
In response, Sibal agreed to the timeline, mentioning,
“Your Lordships may have it after four weeks. In the meantime, my Constitution Bench [hearing] will also be over.” He further added, “We have given the pages and everything. Besides the evidence, our first submission is Sections 16, 17, and 18 do not apply at all.“
The case has seen multiple adjournments, with the hearing being postponed five times since the top court issued a notice on Khalid’s plea on May 18. Notably, one of the judges, Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra, recused himself from the case last month.
Umar Khalid, a former scholar from Jawaharlal Nehru University, is among the accused in the case, which also involves 59 others, including Pinjra Tod members Devangana Kalita and Natasha Narwal, Jamia Millia Islamia student Asif Iqbal Tanha, and student activist Gulfisha Fatima.
The Delhi High Court, in its previous judgment, had upheld a March 2022 order of a trial court that denied Khalid bail. The High Court observed that the protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act, 2019 (CAA) were linked to the 2020 North-East Delhi riots through various ‘conspiratorial meetings’ held from December 2019 till February 2020. The court also took a stern view of Khalid’s use of phrases like ‘inquilabli salam’ (revolutionary salute) and ‘krantikari istiqbal’ (revolutionary welcome) in a speech, interpreting them as potential incitements to violence. The bench remarked,
“Revolution by itself isn’t always bloodless, which is why it is contradistinctly used with the prefix – a ‘bloodless’ revolution. So, when we use the expression ‘revolution’, it is not necessarily bloodless.”
The court also questioned Khalid for using the word ‘jumla’ against the prime minister, emphasizing that there should be a ‘lakshman rekha’ for criticism.
Khalid’s challenge to the Delhi High Court’s verdict is now before the Supreme Court. Earlier, another bench of the apex court had dismissed the Delhi police’s plea against a high court order that granted bail to co-accused Asif Iqbal Tanha, Natasha Narwal, and Devangana Kalita.
