Delhi riots case: SC rejects Umar Khalid’s review plea

After considering the material placed on record, a Bench of Justices Aravind Kumar and N. V. Anjaria reportedly rejected the plea, observing that no valid ground for review was made out.

The Supreme Court on Monday dismissed a review petition filed by student activist Umar Khalid challenging the January 5 judgment that had denied him bail in the alleged larger conspiracy case linked to the Delhi riots of 2020. 

IANS reported that after considering the material placed on record, a Bench of Justices Aravind Kumar and N. V. Anjaria rejected the plea, observing that no valid ground for review was made out.

“Having gone through the review petition and also the documents enclosed, we do not find any good ground and reason to review the judgment dated 05.01.2026. Accordingly, the review petition is dismissed,” the Bench observed.

The Court also declined the request for an oral hearing of the review plea. 

Before this, on April 13, senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Khalid, had mentioned the matter before the Justice Kumar-led Bench, urging that the review petition be heard in open court.

“I wanted to make a mention, my lords are hearing the review petition in Umar Khalid’s case. It is listed on Wednesday, I believe. My request is, it is only for your consideration if you could have it in an open court,” Sibal had submitted.

The Justice Kumar-led Bench had responded that it would examine the request, and stated, “We will look into the paper, and if required, we will call it.”

Ordinarily, review petitions are decided in chambers on limited grounds, such as errors apparent on the face of the record, and are rarely listed for open court hearing.

2020 Delhi riots case 

Earlier, in January, the apex court refused to grant bail to Khalid and co-accused Sharjeel Imam in the alleged larger conspiracy case arising out of the 2020 Delhi riots.

However, the SC granted bail to five other accused, Gulfisha Fatima, Meeran Haider, Shifa Ur Rehman, Mohd Saleem Khan and Shadab Ahmed, while declining relief to Imam and Khalid.

Pronouncing the verdict, the Justice Kumar-led Bench had held that the prosecution material disclosed a prima facie case against the duo, attracting the statutory bar on bail under Section 43D(5) of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act.

The apex court had observed that the prosecution material and evidence on record did not justify Khalid’s release on bail and indicated his involvement at the level of planning, mobilisation and issuance of strategic directions.

(with IANS inputs)