Activist Umar Khalid Challenges Bail Denial in Supreme Court

10 September, 2025

Activist Umar Khalid has approached the Supreme Court to challenge the Delhi High Court's decision to deny him bail. Khalid was arrested under the stringent Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) in connection with an alleged conspiracy behind the February 2020 Delhi riots. The High Court had rejected his plea, along with those of eight other accused, citing the need to prevent "conspiratorial violence under the garb of demonstrations." The case is a significant test of UAPA's application and civil liberties.

Unpacked:

What is the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), and why is it considered stringent?

The UAPA is an Indian anti-terror law aimed at preventing unlawful activities and terrorism. It is considered stringent because it allows for extended detentions without formal charges, strict bail provisions, and broad definitions that critics argue can be used to suppress dissent and target activists.

What were the specific allegations against Umar Khalid in connection with the 2020 Delhi riots?

Umar Khalid faces charges including conspiracy, rioting, sedition, promoting enmity, terrorism, raising funds for terrorist acts, and murder, based on his alleged role in inciting communal violence during protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) in February 2020.

Why did the Delhi High Court deny bail to Khalid and the other accused?

The Delhi High Court denied bail citing concerns over preventing 'conspiratorial violence under the garb of demonstrations.' The prosecution argued that evidence, like WhatsApp group messages, indicated a premeditated conspiracy to incite violence and undermine the government.

How has Umar Khalid’s arrest been viewed by human rights organizations and civil society?

Human rights groups argue that Khalid’s detention exemplifies the misuse of the UAPA to criminalize peaceful dissent and intimidate critics of the government. They highlight slow legal proceedings and the chilling effect on the right to protest.