Kapil Sibal said Umar Khalid’s nearly five-year custody without bail violates Article 21 and promised to approach the Supreme Court against the Delhi High Court’s order. He questioned judicial delays, political silence, and selective action in the Delhi riots conspiracy case.
Senior advocate and Rajya Sabha member Kapil Sibal has strongly criticized the denial of bail to Umar Khalid in the Delhi riots case. Speaking at a press conference on Friday, Sibal said that the recent Delhi High Court order has violated the fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution and confirmed that the legal team will move the Supreme Court against what he called “injustice.”
Sibal openly raised concerns about the condition of democracy in India. He asked why political parties were not speaking up on such sensitive issues. According to him, parties fear that raising their voice may politically harm them.
He said,
“We don’t want to do the right thing and raise our voice for it. Our lawyers, middle class and society are silent.”
He also appeared to indirectly respond to former Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud’s reported remark that Khalid’s counsel had sought seven adjournments. Sibal clarified that only two adjournments were ever sought by the defence before the Supreme Court.
He said,
“If the court does not give a verdict for years, are lawyers to be blamed for it? This is the state of affairs of the court. If you don’t want to give bail, reject the plea. Why do you have to do 20-30 hearings.”
Giving a timeline of Khalid’s custody, Sibal pointed out that,
“Umar Khalid has been in custody for the last four years, 11 months and 15 days and will continue to be in custody. There have been two appeals — filed in 2022 and in 2024 — that were rejected by high courts. One SLP was filed in 2023 but was withdrawn in 2024.”
He highlighted that the Supreme Court itself has repeatedly said bail applications should be decided quickly, yet in this case that principle has not been followed. According to him,
“The first appeal that came before the high court had 28 hearings in 180 days. In 2024, an appeal was filed and it took 407 days to be rejected.”
Sibal explained that the case against Khalid is based on a speech delivered in Mumbai.
He said,
“The charge is that he gave a speech which implied that there would be violence in future and it is not about killing a person, kidnapping a person or attacking territorial integrity of the country.”
He added that there was no direct evidence against Khalid and that,
“I want to say with confidence that when they are put under trial almost all of them will be discharged. This conspiracy will be before you.”
Sibal also asked,
“Has there been any action against those leaders who made inflammatory speeches, this is the state of the judiciary and the government.”
Pointing out the silence of larger sections of society and political leadership, he added,
“So where should one go and what hope one will have. The political parties also do not raise these issues thinking that this may harm them politically.”
Reiterating his concern, he repeated,
“Where is our democracy going? We don’t want to do the right thing and raise our voice for it. Our lawyers, the middle class and society are silent.”
ALSO READ: Delhi Court: Wife Living in Adultery Cannot Claim Maintenance, Rules Judge
On the role of courts, Sibal said,
“The judges that are sitting in high courts, according to us, this is a violation of Article 21 and this injustice should not be done.”
Despite his criticism, he expressed cautious optimism and said,
“But life depends on hope and we will approach the Supreme Court and expect that we will be heard.”
He also alleged that crucial evidence was being withheld, claiming,
“Delhi Police has the videography of northeast Delhi from the period to which the case relates and the accused have been asking for it that it should be give to court. But prosecuting agencies are refusing.”
Earlier this week, the Delhi High Court had refused bail to nine persons, including Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam, in what is called the “larger conspiracy” case related to the February 2020 Delhi riots.
The bench of Justices Navin Chawla and Shalinder Kaur observed that,
“conspiratorial violence under the garb of demonstrations or protests by citizens cannot be allowed.”
The order also recognized citizens’ rights but drew limits.
The bench said,
“The Constitution affords citizens the right to protest and carry out demonstrations or agitations, provided they are orderly, peaceful and without arms and such actions must be within the bounds of law.”
It went on to state,
“If the exercise of an unfettered right to protest were permitted, it would damage the constitutional framework and impinge upon the law-and-order situation in the country.”
ALSO READ: Sameer Wankhede’s Sister Challenges Police Clean Chit to Nawab Malik in Defamation Case
And finally, the court concluded,
“Any conspiratorial violence under the garb of protests or demonstrations by the citizens cannot be permitted. Such actions must be regulated and checked by the state machinery, as they do not fall within the ambit of freedom of speech, expression and association.”
On the question of long custody and delay in trial, the bench ruled that these factors cannot be applied in all cases equally. Another bench of Justices Subramonium Prasad and Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar separately rejected the bail plea of co-accused Tasleem Ahmed.
Case Background: Delhi Riots 2020 and Umar Khalid’s Charges
The case goes back to the Delhi riots of February 2020, one of the worst incidents of communal violence in the national capital in recent years.
The clashes broke out in northeast Delhi during protests against the Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA) and led to the death of more than 50 people, with hundreds injured and widespread property damage.
The Delhi Police later registered several cases under different provisions, including the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), a strict anti-terror law.
Umar Khalid, a former JNU student leader, along with others like Sharjeel Imam, Shifa-Ur-Rehman, and Gulfisha Fatima, was accused of being part of a “larger conspiracy” behind the riots.
According to the police, the accused allegedly used protests and speeches as a cover to plan violence.
The charge against Khalid is linked to a speech he delivered in Mumbai, which investigators claimed implied that violence could happen in the future.
However, Khalid and his lawyers maintain that it was a lawful protest speech and that there is no direct evidence connecting him to acts of violence.
Click Here to Read Previous Reports on Delhi riots case
