Today, On 3rd November, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Umar Khalid, told the Supreme Court that out of 751 Delhi riots FIRs, 116 cases have been tried and 97 ended in acquittals, with 17 involving fabricated documents, exposing poor investigation quality.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court heard today the bail pleas of Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam, Gulfisha Fatima, and Meeran Haider, who have been accused in the alleged conspiracy behind the 2020 Delhi riots.
The matter came up before a Bench comprising Justice Aravind Kumar and Justice N.V. Anjaria.
Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal appeared for Khalid, while Additional Solicitor General S.V. Raju is representing the Delhi Police.
At the outset, Mr. Sibal drew the Bench’s attention to the high rate of acquittals in the Delhi riots cases, noting that the trend reflects the poor quality of investigation and fabrication of evidence in several cases.
Citing data, Mr. Sibal said,
“Out of 116 cases tried and concluded in connection with the Delhi riots, 97 have ended in acquittals, and in nearly 17 cases, the court has pointed to the fabrication of evidence.”
He added that the purpose of placing these facts on record was not to claim any direct relevance to Khalid’s case, but to demonstrate the pattern of faulty investigation.
When Justice Kumar asked,
“How are you concerned with that?”
Mr. Sibal responded,
“Just a fact.”
Justice Kumar then remarked,
“Are you shedding tears for them?”
To which Mr. Sibal clarified that he was only “highlighting the nature and quality of the investigation.”
Explaining Khalid’s position, Sibal said,
“There were 751 FIRs each with the jurisdictional police. I was in one of them. I was discharged. There was another FIR which deals with conspiracy. I am in that. Not in any of the 751 FIRs. The 750 are separate. I am not involved in any of them. I was discharged in December 2022. I am involved in the conspiracy case. Of the 751, 116 cases have been tried and concluded out of which 97 ended up in acquittal. In 17 out of those cases there was fabrication of documents.”
Countering his argument, ASG S.V. Raju remarked that such references were made “just to create prejudice.”
The hearing will continue as ASG Raju is set to present arguments on behalf of the Delhi Police.
Previously, On 31st October Senior Advocates Abhishek Manu Singhvi, Kapil Sibal, and Siddharth Dave made strong submissions before the Supreme Court in the Delhi riots conspiracy case, arguing that the prolonged incarceration of their clients violated the principles of liberty and fairness.
Appearing for activist Gulfisha Fatima, Dr Abhishek Manu Singhvi told the Bench that his client had been in custody for more than five years without trial.
Additionally, during earlier hearing , Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Umar Khalid, told the supreme court that 59 hearing days were lost due to the DSP’s absence and lawyers’ strikes, yet Umar Khalid is blamed for delays, even though he said, “The day when the riots took place I was not in Delhi.”
Previously, The Delhi Police firmly opposed the release of student activists Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam, and three others charged under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) in connection with the 2020 Northeast Delhi riots conspiracy case.
In a statement to the Supreme Court, the police contended that the alleged offenses represented a deliberate attempt to undermine the state, thus justifying “jail and not bail,” as reported by media outlets on Thursday.
The police argued that the petitioners were attempting to portray themselves as victims due to prolonged imprisonment, even though the delay in the trial was a result of their own actions.
In a detailed 177-page affidavit submitted on October 30, the Delhi Police argued that the violence that erupted in February 2020 was not merely a spontaneous reaction to protests against the Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA), but rather a part of a coordinated “regime change operation” disguised as civil dissent, according to a report in the media.
This development comes just a day before the case is set for a hearing.
The prosecution, as cited by media, alleged that the plan intended to provoke communal tensions during US President Donald Trump’s visit, aiming to ‘internationalise’ the unrest and portray the Government of India as discriminatory.
Recently, a bench consisting of Justices Aravind Kumar and NV Anjaria urged the enforcement agency to reconsider whether the accused many of whom have been held in judicial custody as undertrials for nearly five years could be granted bail.
Also Read: India’s 53rd Chief Justice: Centre Approves Appointment of Justice Surya Kant As CJI
Under the UAPA, courts must first establish that the allegations do not, even on a prima facie basis, indicate involvement in terrorist activities before bail can be granted.
The Delhi Police argued that this threshold has not been met in this case.
The affidavit, filed by advocate Rajat Nair, claimed that investigators have gathered ocular, documentary, and technical evidence to demonstrate that the accused were part of a “deep-rooted conspiracy” driven by communal motives.
The police indicated that encrypted chats and messages show the protests were strategically timed to coincide with Trump’s visit in February 2020, ensuring global attention.
The prosecution also pointed to unrest that erupted around the same time in various states, including Uttar Pradesh, Assam, West Bengal, Karnataka, Kerala, Maharashtra, and Bihar, suggesting a “pan-India plan” rather than isolated incidents.
Recently, Umar Khalid informed the sessions court at Karkardooma that the prosecution has added embellishments to the chargesheet regarding the larger conspiracy case tied to the 2020 Delhi Riots.
During that hearing, Senior Advocate Trideep Pais, representing Khalid, argued that the Delhi Police has distorted witness statements.
He stated,
“He [Khalid] has been in custody for 5 years for this. No violence had occurred. No weapons were recovered. Chargesheet has embellishment added by prosecution. Without evidence, there is no criminality,”
After concluding his arguments for the day, Pais requested that Khalid be allowed two books in Tihar Jail, including one on cricket.
The court is currently deliberating on the charges in the Delhi Riots conspiracy case.
The accused in this case include Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam, Safoora Zargar, Natasha Narwal, Asif Iqbal Tanha, Tahir Hussain, Khalid Saifi, Isharat Jahan, Meeran Haider, Gulfisha Fatima, Shifa-Ur-Rehman, Shadab Ahmed, Tasleem Ahmed, Saleem Malik, Mohd Saleem Khan, Athar Khan, and Faizan Khan.
The violence occurred during protests against the proposed Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) and National Register of Citizens (NRC), resulting in 53 deaths and over 700 injuries.
According to the allegations, Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam, Gulfisha Fatima, Shifa Ur Rehman and Meeran Haider were involved in orchestrating protests, delivering inflammatory speeches and mobilising crowds, which, as per the prosecution, triggered the large-scale violence in Delhi in 2020.
They are now seeking bail from the Supreme Court under the stringent provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) concerning the February 2020 Delhi riots. In 2020, Imam was arrested under the UAPA and identified as the main conspirator in the Delhi riots case.
Meanwhile, the Supreme Court is set to hear the bail applications filed by Khalid and others on Friday, October 31.
Earlier, On September 2, the Delhi High Court denied bail to Imam, Khalid, and seven others: Mohd Saleem Khan, Shifa Ur Rehman, Athar Khan, Meeran Haider, Shadab Ahmed, Abdul Khalid Saifi, and Gulfisha Fatima. On the same day, another accused, Tasleem Ahmed, had his bail plea rejected by a different bench of the High Court.
Click Here to Read Previous Reports on Delhi riots case