SC urges Delhi HC to expedite bail hearing of Sharjeel Imam
Imam’s bail application, first filed in April 2022, has been listed over 60 times without reaching a final resolution
The Supreme Court on Friday recommended the Delhi high court to consider an expedited hearing for the bail plea of Sharjeel Imam, a student activist detained in connection with the 2020 Delhi riots conspiracy case, who has spent 1,730 days in jail.
Imam’s bail application, first filed in April 2022, has been listed over 60 times without reaching a final resolution. In this prolonged period, the plea has repeatedly faced adjournments due to various procedural and roster-related issues, significantly delaying a final order and Imam’s opportunity for interim release.
A bench comprising justices Bela M Trivedi and Satish Chandra Sharma pointed out that while it would not issue a direct mandate, it expected the high court to respond to Imam’s request for a swift hearing on the next scheduled date, November 25.
“The petitioner shall be at liberty to request the high court to hear the bail application as expeditiously as possible on the next date and it is expected that the high court shall consider the said request,” the bench said in its order.
Following submissions by senior counsel Siddharth Dave, representing Imam, the bench also recorded in its order that the petitioner did not argue or press for bail before the top court, leaving the issue to be urged fully before the high court.
During the brief hearing, Dave raised concerns about procedural lapses and recusal-related delays, explaining that Imam’s case has been adjourned repeatedly over more than a year, prolonging his incarceration without trial. Dave pointed out that under Section 21(2) of the National Investigation Agency Act (NIA), there exists an expectation that appeals of this nature should ideally be resolved within a three-month period. He implored the court to expedite Imam’s hearing, citing that the initial bail petition has been pending without an effective hearing since its filing in Aril 2022.
“I am not blaming anyone. Allow it or reject it, but please decide it. It has been listed for 64 times in the high court in the last two-and-a-half years,” contended Dave, adding that while Imam has filed several motions and his bail plea has been listed for hearings, there have been repeated deferrals, resulting from judicial recusal, procedural backlogs and bench changes.
The bench responded that there was a total of eight FIRs lodged against Imam, to which Dave clarified that only one was currently relevant to his plea—an FIR filed under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) concerning the alleged conspiracy behind the 2020 Northeast Delhi riots.
While the bench questioned the maintainability of Imam’s petition before the top court when the issue of bail remained pending in the high court, Dave pleaded that his client expected the Supreme Court to act as a repository of the Constitution and send a message to the high court for expeditious disposal of the matter.
With Dave’s categorical statement that he was not pressing for bail in the apex court, the bench proceeded to state in its order that even though it is not inclined to entertain Imam’s writ petition seeking interim release, the high court is expected to consider speeding up the bail proceedings.
Imam, a former student of Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU), was arrested on January 28, 2020, following a speech he delivered during anti-Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) protests. The police allege that Imam’s speeches incited violence, contributing to communal unrest and riots in Northeast Delhi, which resulted in 53 deaths and injuries to over 700 individuals. The charges filed against Imam and other activists include sections of the UAPA, various provisions of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), the Arms Act, and the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, highlighting the severity of allegations against them.
Imam initially approached the trial court for bail, which was denied. Subsequently, he filed an appeal with the Delhi high court in April 2022. However, this plea faced numerous setbacks due to roster changes, recusals and procedural delays. In September this year, Imam submitted an additional plea to the high court, requesting an early hearing. But his prayer was rejected on the ground that the bail plea was already listed on October 7. In October, the division bench assigned to hear the matter did not assemble, leading to another adjournment until November 25.
His petition in the top court, filed through advocate Fauzia Shakil, urged the top court to issue a mandate to the Delhi high court for quickly deciding his bail plea. Alternatively, it requested the Supreme Court to order his release on interim bail.
Imam’s bail plea is part of a larger conspiracy case that implicates several other activists, including Umar Khalid and Gulfisha Fatima, all of whom have been accused of organising protests against the CAA and allegedly instigating violence. The case’s primary charge sheet was filed in September 2020, implicating activists associated with anti-CAA protests and organisations such as Pinjra Tod and the Jamia Coordination Committee. Subsequently, a supplementary charge sheet was filed in November 2020 against Umar Khalid and Imam.
Imam was granted bail by the Delhi high court in May in a separate case in which he is charged with sedition and unlawful activity under the UAPA for alleged inflammatory speeches during the anti-CAA protests in 2019-2020. He was granted bail on technical grounds under Section 436-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), where an accused is granted bail if he has served half of the maximum period of imprisonment prescribed for the offence. The charges against Imam under Section 13 of the UAPA carried a maximum sentence of seven years in this case while he had spent over four years as an under trial.
Ends