Supreme Court Reluctantly Adjourns Umar Khalid's Bail Plea As Kapil Sibal Said He Is Engaged Before Constitution Bench
The Supreme Court today adjourned former JNU student Umar Khalid's plea challenging the order passed by the Delhi High Court denying him bail on insistence by his representing counsel, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal.
Sibal said that he is engaged before the Constitution Bench. He further informed the Court that A.S.G S.V Raju appearing for the State also was not available. It is pertinent to note that in the earlier hearing on November 29, 2023, both the counsels on a joint request had sought to adjourn the hearing of the matters on the ground of non-availability of the concerned Senior Advocates who are going to argue the matters.
Khalid is an accused in a case involving the UAPA Act, related to the alleged conspiracy behind the 2020 riots in Delhi.
A bench comprising Justice Bela M. Trivedi and Justice Pankaj Mithal showing immense displeasure, reluctantly deferred the hearing.
When the matter was called on today, Sibal appeared to seek more time in the matter and to apprise the Court that he is engaged in a constitution bench matter. To which the bench rejected the request outright.
"He is in Jail. How does it matter? Mr. Raju (ASG SV Raju) said he is also not available. I am in a Constitution bench. Kindly give a week", argued Sibal.
Justice Trivedi while refusing to grant exemption said, "You have earlier said matter was not being heard. Mr Sibal do not say anything that is unnecessary...".
Pursuant to which the bench agreed to list the matter on January 17, 2023. However, Sibal further requested to let the matter be listed on January 24, 2023.
Subsequently, Senior Advocate Arvind Datar sought permission to file written submissions in a connected matter.
The Delhi High Court had on October 18, 2022, dismissed the bail application filed by Umar Khalid. The High Court noted that the acts of the accused prima facie qualified as terrorist acts under the anti-terror law UAPA. The Delhi High Court Bench of Justice Siddharth Mridul and Justice Rajnish Bhatnagar said that the anti-CAA protests metamorphosed into violent riots, which prima facie seemed to be orchestrated at the conspiratorial meetings, and the statements of the witnesses indicate Khalid's active involvement in the protests.
In its 52-page order, the Court observed that the planned protests were not the kind that is normal in political culture or democracy (but were) far more destructive and injurious and geared towards extremely grave consequences and the acts of the accused prima facie qualified as a terrorist act under UAPA.
Khalid, Sharjeel Imam, and several others have been booked under the anti-terror law Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) and provisions of the Indian Penal Code for allegedly being the "masterminds" of the February 2020 riots, which left 53 people dead and over 700 injured.
Cause Title: Umar Khalid v. State of NCT Of Delhi
