NEW DELHI — The Association for Protection of Civil Rights (APCR) has strongly criticised the Supreme Court decision to deny bail to Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam in the 2020 Delhi riots larger conspiracy case, calling their continued imprisonment unjust and deeply troubling.
In a statement issued on January 5, 2026, the APCR has expressed concern over the Supreme Court order that refused bail to Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act, while granting bail to five other accused, Gulfisha Fatima, Meeran Haider, Shifa-ur-Rehman, Mohd Saleem Khan and Shadab Ahmed, subject to strict conditions.
Welcoming the bail granted to the five accused, APCR said their release brings partial relief after years of incarceration without trial. The organisation highlighted that it had actively supported the legal cases of Meeran Haider, Mohd Saleem Khan and Shadab Ahmed. However, it said this relief was overshadowed by the continued detention of Umar Khalid and Imam.
“The continued imprisonment of Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam is unjust, disproportionate and without substantive grounds,” APCR said, adding that the denial of bail raises serious concerns about civil liberties and the misuse of stringent laws.
A Supreme Court bench of Justices Aravind Kumar and N V Anjaria said on Monday that bail pleas must be examined individually, as all accused do not stand on the same footing in terms of alleged culpability. “Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam stand on a qualitatively different footing as compared to the other accused,” the court observed while rejecting their bail pleas.
The bench noted that delay in trial can trigger judicial scrutiny even in cases under the UAPA. It clarified that while bail is not routinely granted under the law, it is also not automatically barred. “Section 43D 5 of the UAPA departs from general provisions for bail, but it does not exclude judicial scrutiny or mandate denial of bail in default,” the court said.
The Supreme Court also stressed that Article 21 of the Constitution places a duty on the state to justify prolonged pre-trial detention. While granting bail to the five accused, the court made it clear that the relief does not dilute the allegations against them and that bail can be cancelled if conditions are violated.
APCR reiterated its demand for the release of all political prisoners and urged authorities to uphold constitutional values, personal liberty and the right to a fair and timely trial.
Earlier, on December 10, the Supreme Court had reserved its verdict on the batch of special leave petitions (SLPs) challenging the Delhi High Court’s refusal to grant bail to the accused in the 2020 riots “larger conspiracy” case.
During the proceedings, senior advocate A.M. Singhvi, appearing for Ms. Fathima, had questioned what “public interest” would be served by the continued incarceration of a woman who had already spent nearly six years in custody as an undertrial. Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, also appearing for the petitioners, had characterised such prolonged detention as amounting to a pre-trial conviction.
The case relates to the February 2020 Delhi riots that broke out amid protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act. The Delhi Police Special Cell has alleged a larger conspiracy behind the violence.
Umar Khalid was arrested in September 2020 and has remained in jail since then. Sharjeel Imam has faced multiple cases across states and remains in custody in the larger conspiracy case despite getting bail in other matters.
