Arguing for bail on grounds of delay in trial and parity along with other co-accused in the larger conspiracy case of the Northeast Delhi riots, student activist Umar Khalid submitted before the Delhi High Court that he has “completed” or have undergone more than “half” of the sentencing period in the 34 offences charged against him.
At the same time, his co-accused Meeran Haider submitted before a division bench of Justices Navin Chawla and Shalinder Kaur that the prosecution has “conflated protests to riots and then they conflate organisation (organising) to protests” in the case.
Khalid and Haider have been in jail for over four years.
Making a case of parity citing the bail granted to activists Natasha Narwal and Devangana (Kalita), also accused in the larger conspiracy case, senior advocate Trideep Pais, on behalf of Khalid, submitted that the “allegations are based on hearsay” and that he is not “part of any recovery, any violence”.
“Natasha and Devangana take part in purported “secret meetings” and are out on bail,” submitted Pais as he disputed the nature of the so-called “secret meetings”. He highlighted that none of the witnesses called the said meetings to be secret and the photos of the meeting were shared on Facebook as well.
“There is no violence alleged as a direct result of the meeting. I’m not part of any FIR in that area either,” said Pais while pointing out that the only overt act on Khalid’s part was a speech he had given at Amravati in Maharashtra. “I was thousands of miles away from Delhi… It is a speech invoking Gandhian principles of non-violence, saying that we should protest against this law (CAA/NRC),” he submitted.
Questioning the rationale of selectively arraigning the accused in the case of larger conspiracy pertaining to the riots, Pais said, “While many attended meetings…what is the point of making us accused and not them (others who attended such meetings)?”
Story continues below this ad
Haider, through his advocate Shri Singh, pointed out, “They (prosecution) conflate protests to riots and then they conflate organisation (organising) to protests. So, if I’m part of the organising committee of these WhatsApp groups (it is conflated as protesting)… In a (CrPC section) 164 statement, protest has been struck off with (the word) “danga” (rioting). This is the quality of evidence. One word that would turn everything around has been cut off and edited. This is the nature of material qua me”.
“They said I was part of speeches… (what I said was) that the law is unconstitutional, there are historical figures and data, etc…According to them (prosecution), there are two secret meetings that were held…I’m not present in either of these meetings,” Singh further submitted.
Addressing the allegation that Haider’s attempts at de-escalation on February 24, 2020 “was merely a smokescreen”, Singh pointed out that the only evidence to support the said claim was that the accused “received three phone calls during this de-escalation”.
“There is no recovery — chilli powder, hockey sticks etc — which they allegedly found from others… I’m not present on any of the rioting sites between February 20-27, 2020… None of the witnesses take my name,” Singh emphasised.
Story continues below this ad
The court has now kept this batch of bail pleas for further consideration on December 12 when the prosecution is expected to argue their case. Two other bail pleas by Sharjeel Imam and Shadab Ahmed who also want to argue on the merits of the case along with the grounds of delay of trial, were expected to be heard on December 12. But it is now expected to be adjourned.
Sohini Ghosh is a Senior Correspondent at The Indian Express. Previously based in Ahmedabad covering Gujarat, she recently moved to the New Delhi bureau, where she primarily covers legal developments at the Delhi High Court
Professional Profile
Background: An alumna of the Asian College of Journalism (ACJ), she previously worked with ET NOW before joining The Indian Express.
Core Beats: Her reporting is currently centered on the Delhi High Court, with a focus on high-profile constitutional disputes, disputes over intellectual property, criminal and civil cases, issues of human rights and regulatory law (especially in the areas of technology and healthcare).
Earlier Specialty: In Gujarat, she was known for her rigorous coverage in the beats of crime, law and policy, and social justice issues, including the 2002 riot cases, 2008 serial bomb blast case, 2016 flogging of Dalits in Una, among others.
She has extensively covered health in the state, including being part of the team that revealed the segregation of wards at the state’s largest government hospital on lines of faith in April 2020.
With Ahmedabad being a UNESCO heritage city, she has widely covered urban development and heritage issues, including the redevelopment of the Sabarmati Ashram
Recent Notable Articles (Late 2025)
Her recent reporting from the Delhi High Court covers major political, constitutional, corporate, and public-interest legal battles:
High-Profile Case Coverage
She has extensively covered the various legal battles - including for compensation under the aegis of North East Delhi Riots Claims Commission - pertaining to the 2020 northeast Delhi riots, as well as 1984 anti-Sikh riots.
She has also led coverage at the intersection of technology and governance, and its impact on the citizenry, from, and beyond courtrooms — such as the government’s stakeholder consultations for framing AI-Deepfake policy.
Signature Style
Sohini is recognized for her sustained reporting from courtrooms and beyond. She specialises in breaking down dense legal arguments to make legalese accessible for readers. Her transition from Gujarat to Delhi has seen her expand her coverage on regulatory, corporate and intellectual property law, while maintaining a strong commitment to human rights and lacuna in the criminal justice system.
X (Twitter): @thanda_ghosh ... Read More
