Decide Sharjeel Imam’s bail plea in sedition case by next month: Delhi HC to trial court
The bench further said in case Imam is denied bail by the trial court, he has the right to file an appeal on the grounds already mentioned in his appeal before the HC or on any other ground.

The Delhi High Court Tuesday directed the trial court to decide by next month Sharjeel Imam’s bail plea relating to the 2020 riots case involving allegations of sedition.
Imam, who was booked in 2020 under sections of the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA) and sedition among other offences, had moved the trial court last year seeking statutory bail for completing half of the maximum sentence of seven years for the offences committed by him.
Imam’s bail plea before the trial court is next listed on February 7. A division bench of Justice Suresh Kumar Kait and Justice Manoj Jain said, “… we direct the trial court to decide the application within 10 days from the next date of hearing (in the trial court).”
The bench further said in case Imam is denied bail by the trial court, he has the right to file an appeal on the grounds already mentioned in his appeal before the HC or on any other ground.
Appearing for Imam, advocate Talib Mustafa submitted before the bench that out of “43 witnesses, 22 have been examined”. He further submitted that “four years out of a maximum sentence of seven years, if convicted,” had been served by Imam, which is “more than half of the sentence”.
The HC was informed that although the trial court had reserved the order in September last year, however, the then presiding officer had been transferred and the matter was now before a new presiding officer.
Imam was booked for sedition by the Delhi Police for allegedly making inflammatory speeches at Aligarh Muslim University and Jamia Millia Islamia with respect to the Citizenship Amendment Act. Later, Section 13 of the UAPA was invoked against him. He has been in judicial custody since January 28, 2020.
Imam had sought bail before the trial court under Section 436A of the CrPC. According to the provision, a person can be released from custody if they have spent more than half of the maximum sentence prescribed for the offence.
He had argued that he is entitled to be released on statutory bail as per Section 436A of the CrPC as he had undergone over half (four years) of the maximum seven years of punishment prescribed under UAPA Section 13 (punishment for unlawful activities).