Kamal Ghorui
NEW DELHI: A Delhi court on Monday granted 10-day interim bail to Sharjeel Imam in a case linked to the 2020 Delhi riots, for attending his brother’s wedding.Additional Sessions Judge Sameer Bajpai was hearing the interim bail application filed by Imam, seeking relief for six weeks to attend the marriage scheduled this month. The court granted interim bail from March 20 to 30.Imam is an accused in the case pertaining to the February 2020 riots in northeast Delhi that left 53 people dead and more than 700 injured.
The interim bail comes months after the Supreme Court of India rejected Imam’s regular bail plea in January this year. At the time, the top court had refused bail to Imam and fellow student activist Umar Khalid in the Delhi riots conspiracy case.In its January 6 order, the Supreme Court said that delay in trial and long incarceration cannot be a “trump card” to secure bail in cases registered under the stringent Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act. The court observed that while personal liberty is important, it cannot be the sole factor when allegations involve serious offences affecting public order and national security.The bench of Justices Aravind Kumar and N V Anjaria rejected the bail pleas of Khalid and Imam but granted relief to five co-accused in the case. Those granted bail included Gulfisha Fatima, Meeran Haider, Shifa-ur-Rehman, Mohd Saleem Khan and Shadab Ahmad.The court said Khalid and Imam stood on a different footing compared with the other accused due to the “hierarchy of culpability”. Both activists have spent more than five years in jail in connection with the case.The riots erupted in February 2020 during protests against the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019, leading to communal clashes in parts of northeast Delhi during the visit of then US President Donald Trump to India.The Supreme Court had said the two accused could apply for bail again after one year or after all protected witnesses in the trial had been examined, whichever occurs earlier.The top court also said that the mere passage of time cannot automatically justify bail in cases involving offences under special statutes such as UAPA. It stressed that courts must balance constitutional protections under Article 21 with Parliament’s intent behind stricter bail conditions in laws dealing with national security related offences.
