Umar Khalid and others are accused in a UAPA case linked to the larger conspiracy of 2020 Delhi riots. On May 28, Delhi's Karkardooma Court refused to grant regular bail to the former JNU student leader. The court had observed that the allegations against him were prima facie true and he did not deserve bail
File pic
The Delhi High Court (HC) on Thursday listed the bail pleas of Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) student leader Umar Khalid and the others, who are accused in an Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) case linked to the alleged larger conspiracy of 2020 Delhi riots, for hearing on October 7, reported news agency ANI.
Apart from Khalid, a division bench of HC Justices Suresh Kumar Kait and Girish Kathpaliya listed the bail pleas of Abdul Khalid Saifi, Gulfisha Fatima, Sharjeel Imam, and Shadab Ahmed for October 7.
On July 24, the court issued a notice to Delhi Police over Khalid's bail plea.
ADVERTISEMENT
Khalid was arrested in September 2020 and is in custody since then. He sought a regular bail under Section 437 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, along with Section 43D (5) of the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act, 1967, for grant of regular bail. The police filed the charge sheet and supplementary charge sheets in the case.
However, the former JNU student leader's bail petition was dismissed by the Karkardooma Court court on May 28, following which he moved Delhi HC.
While rejecting Khalid's bail plea, the trial court referred to the order of the Delhi HC which said that the allegations against the accused were prima facie true and he did not deserve bail.
Special judge Sameer Bajpai in his order said, " Hon'ble High Court analyzed the case against the applicant and finally concluded that allegations against the applicant are prima-facie true and that the embargo created by section 43D(5) of UAPA squarely applies against the applicant and the applicant does not deserve bail. It is clear that the Hon'ble High Court has minutely considered the role of the applicant and declined the relief as desired by him," the Special judge observed in the order passed on May 28.
The trial court also said that HC did a surface analysis and concluded that a prima facie case is made out against the accused.
"As according to Vernon's case as relied upon by ld. counsel for the applicant, while considering bail, no 'deep analysis' of the facts of a case can be done and only 'surface analysis' of the probative value of evidence has to be done and as such the Hon'ble High Court has, in fact, did complete surface analysis of the probative value of the evidence while considering the prayer of the applicant for grant of bail and after doing so it was concluded that prima-facie case is made out against the applicant," the trial court noted in the order.
(With ANI inputs)
Subscribe today by clicking the link and stay updated with the latest news!" Click here!
