Days after Mamdani's letter, SC verdict on Umar Khalid's bail on Jan 5

New Delhi: The Supreme Court will pronounce its verdict on January 5 on the bail pleas of activists Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam and others accused in the February 2020 Delhi riots “larger conspiracy” case, days after New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani wrote a note to Khalid and a group of US lawmakers urged that he be granted bail and a “fair, timely trial”.

A bench of Justices Aravind Kumar and N V Anjaria will deliver the verdict on multiple pleas filed by the accused.

The top court reserved its verdict on December 10 after hearing separate pleas of the accused. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta and Additional Solicitor General S V Raju appeared for the Delhi Police, while senior advocates Kapil Sibal, Abhishek Singhvi, Siddhartha Dave, Salman Khurshid and Sidharth Luthra represented the accused.

Mamdani’s handwritten note to Khalid, recalling his words on “bitterness” and the need to not let it consume oneself, was posted on X by Khalid’s partner Banojyotsna Lahiri. The note said Mamdani had met Khalid’s parents and that “we are all thinking of you”.

The note drew a sharp political response in India. The BJP accused Mamdani of “interfering” in India’s internal matters and said India would not tolerate any such effort. BJP spokesperson Gaurav Bhatia questioned Mamdani’s locus standi and asserted that Indians have faith in the country’s judiciary.

Separately, a group of US lawmakers has written to India’s Ambassador to the US, Vinay Kwatra, urging that Khalid be granted bail and a “fair, timely trial in accordance with international law”. US Representatives Jim McGovern and Jamie Raskin are among eight lawmakers who expressed “continued concern” over the “prolonged pre-trial detention” of individuals charged in connection with the February 2020 violence, including Khalid.

The lawmakers said the US-India partnership is rooted in democratic values and constitutional governance, and argued that as the world’s largest democracies, both countries have an interest in protecting freedom, the rule of law, human rights and pluralism. They claimed that human rights organisations, legal experts and global media have raised questions about the fairness of the investigation and legal process linked to Khalid’s detention.

They also noted that the matters are under consideration before the Supreme Court of India and said they welcomed news that Khalid received temporary bail to attend his sister’s wedding. They urged that he be granted bail for the duration of the proceedings and sought details of steps being taken to ensure the judicial process meets international standards.

In court, the Delhi Police strongly opposed the bail pleas and said the February 2020 riots were not spontaneous, but an “orchestrated, pre-planned and well-designed” attack on India’s sovereignty.

Additional Solicitor General Raju argued that all participants in a conspiracy are liable for each other’s acts. “Acts of one conspirator can be attributed to others,” he contended, adding that Imam’s speeches could be treated as evidence against co-accused, including Khalid, in the case. Raju also alleged that Khalid deliberately planned to leave Delhi before the riots as he wanted to deflect responsibility.

Seeking bail, Imam expressed anguish before the apex court over being “labelled” a “dangerous intellectual terrorist” without a full-fledged trial or a single conviction.

Senior advocate Siddharth Dave, appearing for Imam, argued that he was arrested on January 28, 2020, before the communal violence in Northeast Delhi, and said speeches alone could not constitute the offence of “criminal conspiracy” in the riots case.

Khalid, Imam, Gulfisha Fatima, Meeran Haider and Shifa Ur Rehman have been booked under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (UAPA), and provisions of the IPC for allegedly being the “masterminds” of the riots, which left 53 people dead and more than 700 injured in northeast Delhi.

The violence erupted during protests against the Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA) and the National Register of Citizens (NRC). Section 16 of the UAPA provides that whoever commits a terrorist act resulting in death can be punished with death or life imprisonment and fine.

The accused moved the Supreme Court challenging the Delhi High Court’s September 2 order denying them bail in the “larger conspiracy” case linked to the February 2020 riots.