Did Sharjeel Imam Really Conspire in the 2020 Delhi Riots?
Click to start listening
Synopsis
The ongoing legal battle surrounding Sharjeel Imam's involvement in the 2020 Delhi riots takes a new turn as he appeals to the Supreme Court for bail. This case, marked by severe violence and significant implications for national security, raises pressing questions about justice and accountability.
Key Takeaways
- Sharjeel Imam has appealed to the Supreme Court after his bail was denied.
- The 2020 Delhi riots resulted in significant loss of life and injury.
- The High Court dismissed multiple bail pleas linked to a larger conspiracy.
- Solicitor General Mehta argued against the characterization of the case as a simple riot.
- The case raises critical questions about national security and civil rights.
New Delhi, Sep 6 (NationPress) Sharjeel Imam, implicated in the conspiracy surrounding the 2020 Delhi riots, has approached the Supreme Court on Saturday to contest the refusal of bail by the High Court in this five-year-old case, as stated by his lawyer.
Imam faces charges under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) among other legal provisions.
The riots in February 2020 resulted in the deaths of 53 individuals and left approximately 700 injured. This violence erupted during protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act and the National Register of Citizens (CAA-NRC).
On Tuesday, the Delhi High Court rejected bail requests from Sharjeel Imam, Umar Khalid, and other individuals implicated in the broader conspiracy related to the 2020 riots.
The ruling was delivered by a bench comprising Justices Navin Chawla and Shalinder Kaur, stating, “All the appeals are dismissed.”
A detailed copy of the judgement is pending publication on the official website of the Delhi High Court.
In July, the bench led by Justice Chawla had reserved its verdict after considering oral arguments from both the accused and Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Delhi Police.
During the hearings, Solicitor General Mehta opposed the bail requests, arguing that the lengthy detention of the accused should not justify their release on bail pending trial. He contended that they were involved in a meticulously planned criminal conspiracy aimed at discrediting the nation prior to US President Donald Trump’s visit in 2020.
Mehta remarked, “If you are acting against the nation, then you should remain incarcerated until acquitted or convicted.”
He emphasized, “This is not a typical riot case; it is a carefully orchestrated criminal conspiracy targeting a specific date and time.”
Mehta also referenced speeches from Sharjeel Imam, stating there was an intent to divide the country along religious lines.
He declared, “Their objective was to cause national embarrassment on a global scale.”
In his arguments, Mehta cited various international media reports concerning the Delhi riots, asserting that the accused were not merely protesting against legislation but were plotting something malevolent.
He referred back to a previous court ruling denying bail to Umar Khalid, which classified the entire incident as a “terrorist act.”
Mehta concluded, “Do not perceive this as a simple riot case; it is a premeditated assault on the nation’s sovereignty, executed in the capital.”
Point of View
It's imperative to present a balanced view on the ongoing legal proceedings involving Sharjeel Imam. The case has significant implications not only for the individuals involved but also for the broader discourse on national security and civil rights. While the legal system must uphold justice, it is equally crucial to remain vigilant about the potential repercussions on societal harmony and democratic values.
NationPress
06/09/2025
Frequently Asked Questions
What charges does Sharjeel Imam face?
Sharjeel Imam is charged under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) and other legal provisions connected to the alleged conspiracy behind the 2020 Delhi riots.
What was the outcome of the Delhi High Court's decision?
The Delhi High Court dismissed the bail pleas of Sharjeel Imam and others implicated in the conspiracy, with the bench stating that all appeals were rejected.
What was the impact of the February 2020 riots?
The riots resulted in the deaths of 53 people and left around 700 individuals injured, highlighting significant social unrest during protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act.
What did Solicitor General Mehta argue during the hearings?
Solicitor General Mehta argued that the lengthy incarceration of the accused should not lead to their release and emphasized the severity of the charges, describing the events as a well-planned attack on national sovereignty.
What was the context of the protests during the riots?
The protests were primarily against the Citizenship Amendment Act and the National Register of Citizens, which sparked widespread unrest across the country.
