Begin typing your search above and press return to search.
proflie-avatar
Login
exit_to_app
DEEP READ
exit_to_app
Homechevron_rightIndiachevron_rightDelhi court rejects...

Delhi court rejects Umar Khalid’s bail plea to care for ailing mother

text_fields
bookmark_border
Delhi court rejects Umar Khalid’s bail plea to care for ailing mother
cancel

New Delhi: A Delhi court on Tuesday dismissed jailed student activist Umar Khalid’s plea seeking 15 days’ interim bail to attend the Chehlum ceremony of his late uncle and to care for his ailing mother, who is scheduled to undergo surgery next month.

Additional Sessions Judge Sameer Bajpai of the Karkardooma Courts rejected the application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita read with Section 439 of the CrPC.

According to the plea, Khalid’s uncle, Khursheed Ahmad Khan, died on April 10 and the 40th-day ritual, or Chehlum, is scheduled to be held in Delhi on May 24. Khalid also informed the court that his mother has been advised surgery for lump excision on June 2 at a private hospital.

The plea stated that Khalid’s 71-year-old father was not in a condition to care for his mother and that his five sisters lived separately after marriage. It argued that, as the eldest and only son in the family, Khalid’s presence was necessary before and after the surgery.

Opposing the plea, the prosecution argued that the accused was attempting to misuse the court’s leniency and that the grounds cited were not compelling enough for interim bail. The Special Public Prosecutor submitted that Khalid’s uncle did not fall within the category of “close relations” and that attending the Chehlum ceremony was not essential.

On the issue of his mother’s surgery, the prosecution argued that Khalid’s father and sisters could take care of her and described the procedure as a minor surgery requiring only local anaesthesia.

After hearing both sides, the court noted that although Khalid and other co-accused had previously been granted interim bail and had complied with all conditions, every bail application must be assessed independently on its own merits.

“Not only the applicant but other co-accused persons have been granted interim bail, and they never flouted the conditions as imposed by the Court, but it doesn’t mean that on every occasion whenever the accused seeks bail, the Court should grant the same,” the judge observed.

Rejecting the first ground, the court said attending the Chehlum ceremony of his uncle was “not that necessary” and added that the circumstances would have been different had the ceremony involved an immediate family member. The judge also noted that if the relationship had been extremely close, Khalid would have sought release at the time of his uncle’s death itself.

Regarding his mother’s medical condition, the court said Khalid had several family members who could support her and observed that there appeared to be “no actual requirement” for his assistance. The court further noted that the surgery appeared to be a simple procedure.

“Accordingly, finding the reasons unreasonable, the Court doesn’t deem it appropriate to grant the desired relief to the applicant. The application is dismissed,” the order stated.

Khalid has previously been granted interim bail on multiple occasions in 2022, 2024 and 2025 and had surrendered within the stipulated time on each occasion. In December last year, a Delhi court granted him 14 days’ interim bail to attend his sister’s wedding under strict conditions, including restrictions on movement and social media use.

Khalid has been in judicial custody since September 2020 under provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act and other offences in the alleged “larger conspiracy” case related to the 2020 Delhi riots.

According to the Delhi Police, several student activists involved in protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act during 2019-2020 conspired to orchestrate the riots that broke out in North-East Delhi in February 2020.

Earlier this year, the Supreme Court of India dismissed the bail pleas of Umar Khalid and co-accused Sharjeel Imam, holding that the prosecution material disclosed prima facie grounds attracting the statutory bar on bail under Section 43D(5) of the UAPA. Khalid’s review petition challenging the denial of bail was also dismissed by the top court in April this year.

With IANS inputs

Show Full Article
TAGS:Umar KhalidDelhi riots conspiracy caseUmar Khalid Bail
Next Story