Jailed student activist Sharjeel Imam has approached the Delhi High Court seeking bail in the 2020 northeast Delhi riots 'larger conspiracy' case, with his appeal listed for hearing on Friday, 18 July 2025. The matter is scheduled before a Division Bench of Justice Prathiba M. Singh and Justice Vikas Mahajan, as per the court's official cause list.

Background of the Bail Plea

Imam has challenged the order of the Karkardooma Court that refused him regular bail in the case registered under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) and other penal provisions. Earlier this month, Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) Sameer Bajpai dismissed the regular bail pleas of both Imam and co-accused Umar Khalid, holding that the trial court was bound by the Supreme Court's order dated 5 January 2026, which had declined them bail.

The trial court held that the apex court had made it clear that the two accused could renew their bail prayer only after the examination of protected witnesses relied upon by the prosecution, or on the expiry of one year from the 5 January 2026 order — whichever was earlier. 'The Court has no option but to follow the judgment dated January 5, 2026, as passed by the Supreme Court, whereby the petitions of both the applicants were dismissed,' the trial court stated.

Imam's Contentions Before the Trial Court

During proceedings before the trial court, Imam had argued that there had been a change in circumstances since the Supreme Court's January order. He contended that despite the passage of more than six months, no meaningful progress had been made in the trial — with arguments on framing of charges still ongoing — while he had remained in custody for nearly six years.

Imam also cited subsequent Supreme Court developments, including the judgment in Syed Iftikhar Andrabi vs National Investigation Agency and the interim bail granted to co-accused Tasleem Ahmed and Khalid Saifi, to argue that prolonged incarceration warranted a reconsideration of his bail. The prosecution opposed the plea, maintaining that no substantial change in circumstances had occurred since the Supreme Court's rejection.

The Supreme Court's Divergent Orders

The trial court accepted the prosecution's submissions, holding that the question arising from divergent Supreme Court judgments had already been referred to a larger Bench, and that until the issue was settled, the fresh bail applications could not be entertained.

Earlier in 2026, the Supreme Court dismissed the bail pleas of both Imam and Khalid, finding that the prosecution material disclosed prima facie grounds attracting the statutory embargo on bail under Section 43D(5) of the UAPA. In the same period, the apex court granted bail to five co-accused — Gulfisha Fatima, Meeran Haider, Shifa Ur Rehman, Mohd Saleem Khan, and Shadab Ahmed. More recently, the Supreme Court granted six months' interim bail to co-accused Tasleem Ahmed and Khalid Saifi, while referring to a larger Bench the question of whether prolonged incarceration and trial delay can justify bail despite UAPA restrictions.

About the Case

The case pertains to the alleged larger conspiracy behind the communal violence that erupted in northeast Delhi in February 2020, leaving dozens dead and hundreds injured. Imam is among several accused booked under the UAPA and other penal provisions. His continued detention — approaching the six-year mark — has drawn attention from civil liberties groups who argue that prolonged pre-trial custody raises serious due process concerns.

What Happens Next

The Delhi High Court's Division Bench will hear Imam's bail appeal on Friday. The outcome could have implications for other co-accused still awaiting trial, particularly given the Supreme Court's pending larger Bench reference on whether UAPA's bail restrictions can be overridden by the right against indefinite pre-trial detention.