The Delhi Police has opposed the fresh bail petitions filed by activists Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam before the Delhi High Court in the larger conspiracy case related to the 2020 Delhi riots.
In separate but similar affidavits, the police described Khalid and Imam as alleged “masterminds” of the riots and argued that their fresh bail pleas are “misconceived and illegal” and seek to “mislead” the court.
Police Cites Supreme Court’s January Order
The police has argued that the latest bail petitions cannot be considered because of the Supreme Court’s January 2026 judgment in Gulfisha Fatima v. State (NCT of Delhi), in which bail was denied to Khalid and Imam.
According to the police, the Supreme Court had upheld the application of Section 43D(5) of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) in their cases.
The affidavits stated that the January judgment had already settled the issue of the statutory bar on bail.
“A plain reading of the operative portion of the judgment in Gulfisha reveals that the applicability of Section 43D(5) of UAPA to the Appellant’s case was upheld by the Hon’ble Court,” the police said.
It argued that the issue cannot be reopened through what it described as “specious grounds”.
Police Says Fresh Bail Condition Not Met
The Delhi Police also referred to the Supreme Court’s January 2026 directions, which allowed a fresh bail plea only after the examination of protected witnesses was completed or one year had passed from the order, whichever came first.
The prosecution argued that this condition has not yet been fulfilled.
Khalid and Imam had earlier approached the courts for bail on two occasions. Their pleas were rejected by the trial court, High Court and Supreme Court.
In January 2026, the Supreme Court granted bail to five accused in the case but denied relief to Khalid and Imam.
The two subsequently filed fresh bail applications before the trial court, which rejected them on July 4. They then approached the Delhi High Court.
Police Rejects Reliance on Different Supreme Court Judgment
Khalid and Imam have relied on the Supreme Court’s judgment in Syed Iftikhar Andrabi v. NIA, arguing that it represents a change in circumstances that allows their bail pleas to be reconsidered.
In that case, a different Supreme Court bench questioned aspects of the earlier approach to bail adopted in the Khalid and Imam matter.
The Delhi Police, however, argued that the judgment does not concern the Delhi riots case or the alleged roles of Khalid and Imam.
“Admittedly, the judgment in Syed Iftikhar Andrabi does not deal with the Delhi Riots case or the Appellant’s role therein,” the police said.
The prosecution further argued that the findings in the January 2026 judgment regarding Section 43D(5) of the UAPA were not overturned by the Andrabi judgment.
Police Opposes Reference to Larger Bench
The accused have also relied on the Supreme Court’s order in the case of co-accused Tasleem Ahmed, where the court granted interim bail after noting differences between the judgments in Syed Iftikhar Andrabi and Gulfisha Fatima and referred the issue to a larger bench.
The Delhi Police argued that the reference itself does not change the legal position in Khalid and Imam’s cases.
It maintained that the Supreme Court’s January 2026 judgment specifically concerning the two activists remains binding and that the UAPA bail restrictions continue to apply to their fresh petitions.
The Delhi High Court will now consider the police’s objections along with the fresh bail pleas of Khalid and Imam.
