New Delhi: The Supreme Court has dismissed activist Umar Khalid’s plea seeking a review of a verdict denying him bail, while observing that there are reasonable grounds to believe the allegations levelled against him in connection with a conspiracy behind the 2020 Delhi riots.
A bench of Justices Aravind Kumar and N V Anjaria also rejected a plea seeking an oral hearing of the review petition.
“Having gone through the review petition and also the documents enclosed, we do not find any good ground and reason to review the judgment dated January 5, 2026. Accordingly, the review petition is dismissed,” the bench said in its April 16 order.
According to the Supreme Court’s rules, review petitions are considered by judges who delivered a judgment or passed an order in chambers to remedy an apparent error or a resultant grave injustice that was a consequence of an apex court decision. Parties seeking a review can request judges for an open-court hearing to rectify the grave injustice caused due to the decision under review.
Besides Khalid, the top court had, on January 5, refused bail to Sharjeel Imam but granted it to five others, saying all the accused did not stand on the same footing.
Khalid and Imam, who have been incarcerated since 2020, can file fresh bail pleas after the examination of the protected witnesses or after a year from the day the order was passed, the court had said, as it rejected their contention of a delay in the trial.
There was a prima-facie case against Khalid and Imam under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), the top court had said, noting that prosecution material suggests that they were involved in the “planning, mobilisation and strategic direction” of the riots.
While the two will remain in jail, activists Gulfisha Fatima, Meeran Haider, Shifa Ur Rehman, Mohammad Saleem Khan and Shadab Ahmad were given bail by the court, which had imposed 11 conditions and said any misuse of liberty would lead to cancellation of bail.
The court had noted that the guarantee of liberty enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution is of foundational importance, but at the same time, the security of a community, the integrity of a trial process and the preservation of public order are equally legitimate constitutional concerns.
