2020 Delhi Riots Case: Activist Umar Khalid Moves Supreme Court Against HC Order Denying Bail
Activist Umar Khalid has moved the Supreme Court against the Delhi High Court's order rejecting his bail plea in an Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act case related to the alleged conspiracy behind the February 2020 riots in the national capital.

Umar Khalid challenges Delhi HC bail rejection in 2020 Delhi riots UAPA case | File Photo
New Delhi, Sep 10: Activist Umar Khalid has moved the Supreme Court against the Delhi High Court's order rejecting his bail plea in an Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act case related to the alleged conspiracy behind the February 2020 riots in the national capital.
High Court Denies Bail to Nine Accused
The high court on September 2 denied bail to nine persons, including Khalid and Sharjeel Imam, in the case, saying "conspiratorial" violence under the garb of demonstrations or protests by citizens couldn't be allowed.
List of Accused Facing Bail Rejection
Those who faced rejection include Khalid, Imam, Mohd Saleem Khan, Shifa Ur Rehman, Athar Khan, Meeran Haider, Abdul Khalid Saifi, Gulfisha Fatima and Shadab Ahmed.
Separate Bail Rejection for Another Accused
The bail plea of another accused Tasleem Ahmed was rejected by a different high court bench on September 2. Last week, Imam and Gulfisha Fatima moved the apex court challenging the high court's order.
Court’s Observations on Right to Protest
In its order denying bail to the nine accused persons, the high court said the Constitution affords citizens the right to protest and carry out demonstrations or agitations, provided they are orderly, peaceful and without arms and such actions must be within the bounds of law.
Right to Protest Not Absolute
While the high court said the right to participate in peaceful protests and to make speeches in public meetings was said to have been protected under Article 19(1)(a), and couldn't be blatantly curtailed, it observed the right was "not absolute" and "subject to reasonable restrictions".
Court’s Warning on Unfettered Rights
"If the exercise of an unfettered right to protest were permitted, it would damage the constitutional framework and impinge upon the law-and-order situation in the country," the bail rejection order said.
Charges Against the Accused
Khalid, Imam and the rest of the accused persons were booked under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) and provisions of the IPC for allegedly being the "masterminds" of the February 2020 riots, which left 53 people dead and over 700 injured.
Also Watch:
ALSO READ
Context of the 2020 Riots
The violence erupted during the protests against the CAA and NRC. These accused, who have denied all the allegations levelled against them, have been in jail since 2020 and they sought bail in the high court after a trial court rejected their bail pleas.
(Disclaimer: Except for the headline, this article has not been edited by FPJ's editorial team and is auto-generated from an agency feed.)
RECENT STORIES
-
Kyunki Saas Bhi Kabhi Bahu Thi 2 Written Update, September 10: Mihir And Hemant Have A Huge Fight,... -
Mumbai: SIWS College In Wadala To Host International Conference On IPR In The Age Of AI -
Supreme Court Orders ₹25 Lakh To Convict For Overstay -
Ganeshotsav 2025: Andheri Mandal Follows Unique Tradition, Immerses Ganesha A Day After Sankashti -
Stormy OBC Sub-Cabinet Committee Meeting: Chhagan Bhujbal Slams GRs, Demands Fair Share Of Funds