Opposition parties on Monday questioned the Supreme Court’s refusal to grant bail to activists Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam in the 2020 Delhi riots conspiracy case, drawing a sharp contrast with the repeated paroles granted to Dera Sacha Sauda chief Gurmeet Ram Rahim Singh, a convicted rapist serving a 20-year sentence.
The remarks came hours after Ram Rahim walked out of Sunaria jail in Rohtak on a fresh 40-day parole — his 15th temporary release since his conviction in 2017.
Supreme Court Order In Delhi Riots Case
The Supreme Court on Monday denied bail to Khalid and Imam, observing that there was a prima facie case against them under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA). However, the court granted bail to five other accused, Gulfisha Fatima, Meeran Haider, Shifa Ur Rehman, Mohd. Saleem Khan and Shadab Ahmad, citing a “hierarchy of participation”.
The February 2020 riots in northeast Delhi had left 53 people dead and over 700 injured.
The court also said the trial should proceed expeditiously and noted that Khalid and Imam could apply for bail again if the examination of protected witnesses is not completed within a year.
CPI(M) And RJD Raise Questions
CPI(M) MP John Brittas said the principle that “bail is the rule, jail the exception” appeared to be applied selectively.
“No bail to Umar Khalid — detained for over five years under the draconian UAPA, with the trial yet to even begin. Pre-trial jail is not a punishment!!” Brittas wrote on X.
No bail to Umar Khalid — detained for over 5 years under the draconian UAPA, with the trial yet to even begin. Pre-trial jail is not a punishment !!
The principle that “bail is the rule, jail the exception” clearly doesn’t apply when it comes to certain individuals.
Meanwhile,…— John Brittas (@JohnBrittas) January 5, 2026
Pointing to Ram Rahim’s repeated paroles, he added, “One languishes indefinitely without trial. The other enjoys repeated ‘jail vacations’ on demand.”
In a separate statement, the CPI(M) said the denial of bail violated principles of natural justice and accused the government of using the UAPA to suppress dissent.
‘Troubling Questions’: Manoj Jha
RJD MP Manoj Jha said the Supreme Court’s decision raised “troubling questions” about prolonged pre-trial incarceration.
“While constitutional courts have the power to grant bail where incarceration becomes unduly long, the prevailing judicial view appears to be that the time already spent in jail is still not long enough,” he said.
BJP Welcomes Verdict
The BJP welcomed the apex court’s order. Party spokesperson Shehzad Poonawalla described it as a vindication of the law, while another spokesperson, Pradeep Bhandari, said the ruling exposed attempts to portray Khalid and Imam as “innocent victims”.
