The Delhi High Court has rejected the regular bail pleas of Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam in the case concerning the alleged larger conspiracy behind the February 2020 North-East Delhi riots, observing that it is bound by the specific conditions imposed by the Supreme Court while rejecting their earlier bail pleas in Gulfisha Fatima v. State.

A Division Bench comprising Justice Prathiba M. Singh and Justice Dinesh Bhatti held that the Supreme Court had specifically granted Khalid and Imam liberty to renew their bail applications upon either the completion of examination of protected witnesses relied upon by the prosecution or expiry of one year from January 5, 2026, whichever is earlier. In view of this specific liberty, the High Court held that it could not modify the conditions imposed by the Supreme Court.

Khalid and Imam had sought bail citing, among other grounds, subsequent Supreme Court developments concerning prolonged incarceration under the UAPA, the grant of bail to co-accused Tasim Ahmad and Khalid Saifi, and the further passage of time since the Supreme Court’s January 5, 2026 judgment. The High Court, however, held that the roles attributed to Tasim Ahmad and Khalid Saifi were distinct from those attributed to Khalid and Imam and therefore parity could not be claimed.

The Court also considered the status of the trial and was informed that arguments on charge had substantially progressed. However, proceedings relating to an application concerning inspection of documents in the case of co-accused Devangana Kalita were pending before the Supreme Court, and the Special Court was awaiting the outcome of those proceedings before proceeding with the order on charge.

The High Court ultimately held that, given the specific conditions imposed by the Supreme Court in respect of these two appellants, it could not modify those conditions on the basis of subsequent legal developments relied upon by Khalid and Imam. The bail appeals were accordingly dismissed.