Senior Advocate and Rajya Sabha MP Kapil Sibal held a press conference in New Delhi, sharply criticizing the Delhi High Court’s recent denial of bail to Umar Khalid and other accused in the Delhi Riots larger conspiracy case. Sibal termed the judicial delay a violation of Article 21 (right to life) of the Constitution, accusing the judiciary of holding 20-30 hearings over years without resolution. He remarked, “If Court does not decide for years, we are the ones to be blamed? This is the state of courts. If you do not want to give bail, dismiss the case. Why do you have to hold 20-30 hearings over years?… In our opinion, this was a violation of Article 21. This injustice should not happen. If someone threatens integrity of India, we will stand with the country, not them. But we will have to stand with innocents.”
Sibal announced that Khalid and others would approach the Supreme Court to challenge the High Court’s verdict, expressing confidence in a fair hearing. He defended protest as a constitutional right, asserting, “Protest is a citizen’s constitutional right – does not mean agencies will send people to jail under UAPA.” He highlighted Khalid’s detention of over five years without bail, despite giving the alleged speech in Mumbai and not being in Delhi during the riots, and noted the absence of direct evidence. Sibal criticized the prosecution for withholding riot videos and statements of “protected witnesses,” questioning, “Since the same are not available to the accused, how can they argue?… Chargesheet is not a proof of anything, it’s the agency’s opinion… If chargesheet is treated as proof, no one would get bail.” He predicted acquittal if the case proceeds to trial, stating, “I can confidently say today that if this case goes to trial, all of them will be acquitted. This conspiracy will be exposed.”
Addressing judicial delays, Sibal detailed the first appeal’s 28 hearings over 180 days and the second’s 407 days before a Division Bench, with orders reserved since July 9, 2025, remaining unpronounced. A subsequent Bench refused to hear it. He refuted the High Court’s claim of defense delays, clarifying only two adjournments were sought—one due to health issues and another as he argued before a Constitution Bench in the Article 370 case. Sibal also questioned unexplained recusals, including Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra’s, saying, “Judges should explain their recusal… there must be some reason. There must be something special, which we do not know. A person who has approached the Court for relief, he must know why a judge won’t hear his matter.”
Citing UAPA precedents—Athar Parwez (2 years 4 months), Shoma Kanti Sen (6 years), Jahir Haq (8 years), and KA Najeeb (5 years), where bail was granted despite framed charges (unlike Khalid)—Sibal lamented, “the Supreme Court violates its own decisions.” He noted Khalid withdrew his Supreme Court plea after 272 days due to the recusal, opting for the trial court. Sibal also criticized the broader silence, stating, “53 people died, 2/3rd were of one community… all politicians who gave inflammatory speeches, were proceedings initiated against them? And the judge who asked why they were not being prosecuted, he was transferred. This is the state of the judiciary and the government. Where can one go? Our political parties also don’t raise these issues. A public wrong is happening. Who will raise voice against it? Our lawyers, middle-class, society – all are quiet.”
This press conference underscores ongoing tensions over bail in high-profile cases under the UAPA, with Sibal advocating for judicial accountability and the accused’s rights.
Lawcutor 