Supreme Court Adjourns Hearing Of Umar Khalid's Bail Application Till February 7

The Supreme Court on Thursday (February 1) adjourned the hearing of former JNU scholar and activist Umar Khalid's bail plea in connection with the Delhi riots larger conspiracy case. 

The Bench of Justices Bela M Trivedi and Pankaj Mithal could not take up the matter and posted it to February 7.

Notably, the hearing has been adjourned several times since notice was issued by the top court in the activist's plea on May 18 last year – once on July 12 after the Delhi police sought more time to file a counter-affidavit, then on July 24 after a letter of adjournment was circulated by Khalid's counsel, on August 9 after Justice PK Mishra recused himself, on August 18, when the matter was listed on a miscellaneous day, on September 5 at the behest of the petitioner, on September 12 to allow the bench to go through the evidence on record, on October 12 owing to a paucity of time, on October 31 to hear the bail application with Khalid's writ petition, and again on January 10 on the joint request of both sides. On January 24 & January 31, the bench could not take up the matter.

To recap, the present appeal by Khalid raises a challenge to the Delhi High Court's verdict of October 2023, whereby a March 2022 Trial Court order denying him bail was upheld. In the impugned order, a Division Bench of Justices Siddharth Mridul and Rajnish Bhatnagar had observed that the protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act, 2019 (CAA) were geared towards the 2020 North-East Delhi riots through various "conspiratorial meetings" held from December 2019 till February 2020, some of which were also attended by Khalid.

The High Court took a serious view of Khalid using the words "inquilabli salam" (revolutionary salute) and "krantikari istiqbal" (revolutionary welcome) in a speech given in Amaravati in February 2020, considering it to be an incitement of violence. “Revolution by itself isn't always bloodless, which is why it is contradistinctly used with the prefix - a 'bloodless' revolution. So, when we use the expression 'revolution', it is not necessarily bloodless,” the High Court had observed. During the case, the Bench had also questioned the UAPA accused for using the word "jumla" against the Prime Minister, remarking that there should be a "lakshman rekha" for criticism.

Case Title: Umar Khalid v. State of NCT of Delhi, Criminal Appeal No. 2826 of 2023 (and connected matters)