Senior advocate Prashant Bhushan has strongly criticised the Supreme Court’s decision denying bail to Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam, calling it unfair and unjust. He said keeping them jailed for five years without trial based on protected witness statements makes a mockery of the right to life and liberty.
The strong statement criticising the denial of bail to Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam was made by senior advocate and activist Prashant Bhushan. Reacting sharply to the decision of the Supreme Court of India, Bhushan described the refusal of bail as deeply disturbing and unjust.
“It is totally shocking, unfair & unjust for the SC to deny bail to Umar Khalid and Sharjil Imam.”
He pointed out that neither of the accused has been charged with personally committing acts of violence, but are instead facing allegations of conspiracy.
“They have not been accused of violence themselves, but of Conspiracy.”
Bhushan further highlighted that there are several publicly available videos of speeches made by both Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam, which clearly show them speaking against violence.
“There are multiple videos of their speeches, where they speak against violence.”
According to him, despite such material being in the public domain, the continued incarceration of the accused remains unjustified.
Raising serious concerns about prolonged detention, Bhushan underlined that both individuals have already spent a significant amount of time in prison without the conclusion of their trial.
“They have spent 5 years in Jail w/o trial.”
He stressed that such long incarceration without a final verdict goes against basic principles of criminal jurisprudence and constitutional safeguards.
Criticising the basis on which bail was denied, Bhushan questioned the court’s reliance on police statements of anonymous witnesses.
“Yet the SC denies bail on the basis of police statements of ‘protected witnesses’, whose identities have been concealed.”
He argued that dependence on such evidence compromises fairness and transparency, particularly when personal liberty is at stake.
Condemning the outcome, Bhushan concluded that the decision undermines the very foundation of constitutional rights and freedoms.
“Shameful, & makes a mockery of the right to life & liberty.”
His remarks have reignited the debate around misuse of stringent laws, prolonged pre-trial detention, and the balance between national security and individual freedoms in India’s criminal justice system.
Supreme Court’s Decision on Bail Pleas in Delhi Riots Conspiracy Case
The Supreme Court of India today, refused to grant bail to Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam in cases related to the 2020 Delhi riots.
The apex court held that at this stage, it was not inclined to interfere with the findings of the lower courts, observing that the allegations against the accused relate to a larger conspiracy behind the violence.
The court noted that the prosecution has relied on statements of protected witnesses and other materials collected during investigation to claim the existence of an organised plan.
It further observed that conspiracy cases cannot be assessed solely on the basis of individual acts of violence, as such offences are alleged to be executed through coordinated roles played by different persons.
While acknowledging the long period of incarceration undergone by the accused, the court ruled that the seriousness of the allegations and the nature of evidence cited by the prosecution did not justify the grant of bail at this stage.
The trial court was, however, expected to proceed with the trial expeditiously in accordance with law.
Click Here to Read More Reports On Delhi riots
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
