Denial of bail for Umar, Sharjeel
The Tribune Editorial: High courts can take a cue from the Supreme Court in UAPA cases.
THE denial of bail to nine persons, including student activists Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam, in a case under UAPA (Unlawful Activities Prevention Act) has triggered a debate about the significance of personal liberty, long incarceration and an inordinately delayed trial. According to the Delhi High Court, these factors are not ‘universally applicable’ with regard to bail applications. Khalid and the others are accused of involvement in the ‘larger conspiracy’ of the 2020 Delhi riots; they have been behind bars for the past five years. The Delhi Police have alleged that Khalid and Imam delivered inflammatory speeches to incite and mobilise members of their community. The HC is convinced that the duo’s role in the conspiracy is prima facie grave. However, the apprehension that the accused, if released on bail, could threaten the safety of victims/witnesses and their families, besides society at large, does not seem to hold water.
