The Supreme Court of India on Friday agreed to reconsider the legal principles governing bail under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) while hearing the case of Umar Khalid, who is accused in the alleged larger conspiracy behind the 2020 Delhi riots. The matter has now been referred to a larger bench due to conflicting judgments on bail in terror-related cases.
The development follows recent contradictory observations by courts regarding bail under the stringent anti-terror law. On May 19, a Delhi court denied interim bail to Khalid for two weeks. However, a day earlier, a Supreme Court bench comprising Justices B V Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan observed in another case that under the UAPA, “bail is the rule and jail is the exception”.
If you enjoyed reading this article, you can help support our journalism by adding OHeraldo as a preferred source.
The bench also questioned an earlier order rejecting Khalid’s bail plea and referred to the 2021 judgment in Union of India vs KA Najeeb. That ruling had recognised the constitutional courts’ power to grant bail in cases involving prolonged incarceration despite strict UAPA provisions.
