The Delhi High Court on Tuesday denied bail to former Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) student and activist Umar Khalid in the Delhi Riots conspiracy case [Umar Khalid v. State of National Capital Territory of Delhi]. .A division bench of Justice Siddharth Mridul and Rajnish Bhatnagar passed the order."We don't find any merit in bail appeal, appeal is dismissed," the Court ordered.A detailed judgment is awaited..The Court had reserved its verdict on September 9 after hearing arguments from Senior Advocate Trideep Pais and Special Public Prosecutor Amit Prasad.The arguments in the High Court went on for more than 20 days..Khalid had approached the High Court challenging the dismissal of his bail application by the Karkardooma court in March this year. He was arrested by the Delhi Police in September 2020 and charged with criminal conspiracy, rioting, unlawful assembly as well as several sections of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA).He has remained in jail since then..Arguments on Khalid's bail had started in April. During the very first hearing, the judges remarked that they found his speech at Amravati obnoxious and inciteful.The judges also said that the speech might be innocuous in isolation, but could have been a bugle call for something larger.They questioned Pais on what Khalid meant when he used words like 'inquilab' and 'krantikari'.As the hearings went into the month of May, and the composition of the Bench also changed -- Justice Mridul started heading a different Division Bench -- the two judges said that they will sit almost on a daily basis as a special bench in the post-lunch session and complete the hearing in the matter.Though they initially intended to finish the arguments before June, seeing as how the hearings were taking much longer, the judges decided to continue after the court vacation in June.Eventually, the hearings went on for more than 20 days, prompting even the Bench to remark that it seemed as if they were hearing an appeal against conviction, and not a bail matter..Read a brief summary of arguments in support of Khalid's release and NIA's submissions opposing his here.
The Delhi High Court on Tuesday denied bail to former Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) student and activist Umar Khalid in the Delhi Riots conspiracy case [Umar Khalid v. State of National Capital Territory of Delhi]. .A division bench of Justice Siddharth Mridul and Rajnish Bhatnagar passed the order."We don't find any merit in bail appeal, appeal is dismissed," the Court ordered.A detailed judgment is awaited..The Court had reserved its verdict on September 9 after hearing arguments from Senior Advocate Trideep Pais and Special Public Prosecutor Amit Prasad.The arguments in the High Court went on for more than 20 days..Khalid had approached the High Court challenging the dismissal of his bail application by the Karkardooma court in March this year. He was arrested by the Delhi Police in September 2020 and charged with criminal conspiracy, rioting, unlawful assembly as well as several sections of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA).He has remained in jail since then..Arguments on Khalid's bail had started in April. During the very first hearing, the judges remarked that they found his speech at Amravati obnoxious and inciteful.The judges also said that the speech might be innocuous in isolation, but could have been a bugle call for something larger.They questioned Pais on what Khalid meant when he used words like 'inquilab' and 'krantikari'.As the hearings went into the month of May, and the composition of the Bench also changed -- Justice Mridul started heading a different Division Bench -- the two judges said that they will sit almost on a daily basis as a special bench in the post-lunch session and complete the hearing in the matter.Though they initially intended to finish the arguments before June, seeing as how the hearings were taking much longer, the judges decided to continue after the court vacation in June.Eventually, the hearings went on for more than 20 days, prompting even the Bench to remark that it seemed as if they were hearing an appeal against conviction, and not a bail matter..Read a brief summary of arguments in support of Khalid's release and NIA's submissions opposing his here.
