Activist Shifa-ur-Rehman, seeking bail in a UAPA case linked to February 2020 riots in Delhi, told the Supreme Court on Monday (November 3, 2025) that he was “cherry-picked” and no offence was made out against him under the anti-terror law.
Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam, Gulfisha Fatima, Meeran Haider and Mr. Rehman were booked under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) and provisions of the erstwhile IPC for allegedly being the “masterminds” of the February 2020 riots, which left 53 people dead and over 700 injured.
Also Read: Delhi riots case hearing Updates on November 3, 2025
The violence erupted during the protests against the Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA) and the National Register of Citizens (NRC).
Senior advocate Salman Khurshid, appearing for Mr. Rehman, argued before a bench of Justices Aravind Kumar and N.V. Anjaria that on behalf of the head of the alumni association of Jamia Millia Islamia, no witness has anywhere said that he was involved in violence.
The senior lawyer stated that there can be no dispute that citizens have the right to protest against a law to which they disagree with and that peaceful protest cannot be equated with criminal conduct.
“He has been cherry picked and made an accused. Nothing under the UAPA is made out in any of the allegations. Even if we accept all allegations to be true.
“I have done nothing to delay the trial. Please look at the background of the person. He has fought for local body locations. He treats Jamia as his home,” Mr. Khurshid submitted.
On the issue of parity, Mr. Khurshid argued Mr. Rehman is entitled to bail on the same grounds as co-accused Natasha Narwal, Devangana Kalita, and Asif Iqbal Tanha, who were granted bail by the Delhi High Court in June 2021.
Mr. Khurshid informed the court that Mr. Rehman was earlier granted interim bail on November 25, 2023, and November 11, 2024, and has no other case against him.
“There are protests that have taken place across South Asia, and each has its own context. But we have always been told that when there is an unjust law, we must disobey it, but never with violence,” Mr. Khurshid said.
When the bench remarked that the present case must be viewed in the Indian context, Mr. Khurshid said, “Yes, and the Gandhian method itself teaches that if there is an unjust law, it is our moral obligation to defy it peacefully.”
As the hearing commenced on Monday (November 3), senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Umar Khaild, submitted that out of 116 cases tried and concluded in connection with the Delhi riots, 97 have ended in acquittals, and in nearly 17 cases, the court has pointed to the fabrication of evidence.
When the bench asked how that concerns Mr. Khalid, Sibal replied that he is not directly concerned but is merely placing the facts on record.
“Are you shedding tears for them?” Justice Kumar asked.
Sibal responded that he was merely highlighting the nature and quality of the investigation.
Senior advocate Siddharth Agarwal, appearing for Meeran Haider, submitted that three co-accused with defined roles have already been granted bail, and those orders have been upheld by higher court.
“We raised the issue of parity before the High Court,” Mr. Agarwal said, adding, “My role is much better, much lighter.”
Mr. Agarwal stated that Mr. Haider was arrested on April 1, 2020, and has spent five years and seven months in custody.
The senior lawyer pointed out that even in the latest chargesheet, the prosecution acknowledges that the investigation is still continuing.
The hearing remained inconclusive and will continue on November 6.
Seeking bail in the UAPA case linked to the 2020 Delhi riots, Mr. Khalid on Friday (October 31) told the apex court that there is no evidence linking him to violence and denied conspiracy charges against him.
Published – November 03, 2025 06:04 pm IST
