New Delhi: A Delhi court on Saturday reserved its order on the regular bail pleas filed by Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam in the larger conspiracy case related to the 2020 northeast Delhi riots.
The Karkardooma Court reserved its verdict after hearing arguments on the bail applications filed by the two accused, who have sought regular bail in the case registered under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) and other penal provisions.
Last month, the court issued notice on their bail applications and directed the Delhi Police to file its response.
In his plea, Imam argued that despite more than six months having passed since the Supreme Court rejected his bail application in January, there had been no meaningful progress in the trial. He submitted that arguments on the framing of charges were yet to conclude and that he had remained in custody for nearly six years in connection with the case.
Khalid has also sought regular bail before the trial court, and both applications were heard together.
Earlier this year, the Supreme Court dismissed the bail pleas of Khalid and Imam, holding that the prosecution's material disclosed *prima facie* grounds attracting the statutory bar on granting bail under Section 43D(5) of the UAPA.
At the same time, the apex court granted bail to five other accused in the case—Gulfisha Fatima, Meeran Haider, Shifa Ur Rehman, Mohd Saleem Khan and Shadab Ahmed.
More recently, the Supreme Court granted six months' interim bail to Tasleem Ahmed and Khalid Saifi while referring to a larger Bench the question of whether prolonged incarceration and delay in trial could justify the grant of bail despite the restrictions under Section 43D(5) of the UAPA.
Observing that different Benches of the apex court had expressed divergent views on the interpretation of the three-judge Bench ruling in *Union of India vs K.A. Najeeb*, a Bench of Justices Aravind Kumar and Prasanna B. Varale directed the registry to place the matter before the Chief Justice of India (CJI) for the constitution of an appropriate Bench.
The order came after Additional Solicitor General S.V. Raju, appearing for the Delhi Police, argued that there appeared to be divergence in the manner in which coordinate Benches of the Supreme Court were applying the *K.A. Najeeb* judgment while deciding bail pleas under stringent laws such as the UAPA and the National Investigation Agency (NIA) Act.
The Justice Aravind Kumar-led Bench also took note of the subsequent judgment in *Syed Iftikhar Andrabi vs National Investigation Agency*, in which another coordinate Bench expressed reservations over certain aspects of the ruling that denied bail to Khalid and Imam while granting relief to five other accused in the Delhi riots larger conspiracy case.
Without commenting on the merits of the prosecution's case, the Supreme Court granted interim bail to Ahmed and Saifi for six months, observing that they had undergone substantial incarceration and that the trial was unlikely to conclude in the near future.
With IANS inputs