Have serious reservations: Supreme Court critiques own order denying Umar Khalid bail

The Supreme Court on Monday expressed “serious reservations” over its own earlier judgment denying bail to former JNU student leader Umar Khalid in the Delhi riots larger conspiracy case, observing that the ruling failed to properly apply the principles laid down in an earlier verdict on prolonged incarceration under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA).

In its landmark 2021 ruling in Union of India vs KA Najeeb, the Supreme Court had held that a violation of the fundamental right to a speedy trial could constitute grounds for constitutional courts to grant bail in UAPA cases. However, the court noted on Monday that this precedent was not properly applied while rejecting Umar Khalid’s bail plea.

A bench comprising Justice BV Nagarathna and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan made these observations while granting bail to Syed Iftikhar Andrabi, who had been in custody for over six years in a UAPA case alleging that he funded terrorism through the supply of narcotics, according to Live Law.