Former JNU student activist Umar Khalid, in jail custody for three years in a terror case relating to a “conspiracy” behind the February 2020 Delhi communal riots, on Thursday had his bail hearing adjourned till November 1.

Khalid, whose bail hearing had been adjourned several times before, had sought parity with co-accused Natasha Narwal, Devangana Kalita and Asif Iqbal Tanha who have all received bail.

“He is a young student and PhD scholar and has been in jail for three years. It’s going on and on. What’s happening?” senior advocate Kapil Sibal, representing Khalid, told the bench of Justices Bela M. Trivedi and Dipankar Datta during a brief hearing.

Sibal said Khalid was not involved in any “overt act” and that the allegations against him related to “some conspiracy” that had not been proved yet. He underscored that co-accused Narwal, Kalita and Tanha had received bail and that the trial was yet to start.

“There is no chance of the charges being framed in the matter…. How long will you (authorities) keep him in jail?” Sibal asked.

Additional solicitor-general S.V. Raju opposed the bail plea. He said the charges against Khalid were “serious” and that it was the accused who were delaying the trial process by filing various
interlocutory applications before the trial court and Delhi High Court.

“They (accused) are deliberately not allowing the charges to be framed; they are filing applications,” Raju said.

The bench said it would adjourn the matter to November 1 “due to paucity of time”.

Sibal said he would take only “20 minutes to demonstrate” that the allegations against Khalid cannot be sustained. But the bench said it would hear further arguments on November 1.

After Delhi High Court denied bail to Khalid, his bail plea underwent several adjournments in the apex court for various reasons.

On August 9, one of the judges on an earlier bench -- Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra -- had recused himself from the hearing. There is no protocol for disclosing reasons for a recusal.

Judges usually recuse themselves from a case if they have appeared as counsel in the matter before or have some personal reason to do so.

Bilkis Bano. File photo

Bilkis Bano case: Supreme Court reserves verdict

The Supreme Court on Thursday reserved its verdict on the petition filed by Bilkis Bano challenging the premature release of the 11 convicts who gang-raped her and killed several members of her family.

During the hearings spread over 12 days, a bench of Justices B.V. Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan had indicated that it would examine the issue from various legal angles, including the rights of the victims of such heinous crimes.

Our Legal Correspondent