The Supreme Court on Monday declined to entertain Gulfisha Fatima’s writ petition seeking bail in a case under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) connected to the alleged conspiracy behind the 2020 Delhi riots.
However, the Court recommended that the Delhi High Court proceed with the bail hearing on the scheduled date, November 25, unless exceptional circumstances arise.
The bench, comprising Justices Bela M. Trivedi and Satish Chandra Sharma, heard arguments from Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, who highlighted that Fatima has been in custody for four years and seven months.
Sibal argued that numerous hearings were adjourned, often due to the unavailability of the presiding officer, and pointed out that despite 24 scheduled dates, arguments were heard on only two occasions. “This lady has been inside for four years and seven months,” Sibal said, urging for relief given the lengthy incarceration without trial.
Justice Trivedi referred to a previous writ petition filed by co-accused Sharjeel Imam, which had been similarly disposed of by urging the High Court to expedite the bail hearing. Although Sibal emphasized that further delays could continue in the High Court, the bench maintained that a writ petition under Article 32 was not appropriate since the statutory remedy of bail was still pending.
Sibal referenced a recent Supreme Court ruling that indicated UAPA’s stringent Section 43D(5) should not preclude bail when trial delays are significant. Justice Sharma clarified that the cited ruling came in an appeal after a High Court bail denial, suggesting that due process had been followed.
In their order, the Supreme Court stated: “We are not inclined to entertain the writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution… Since the petitioner has been in custody for 4 years and 7 months, it is requested that the bail application may be heard on the date fixed unless there are extraordinary circumstances.”
Gulfisha Fatima, arrested in April 2020, was initially granted bail in a related case but denied bail in the larger conspiracy case in March 2022 by Additional Sessions Judge Amitabh Rawat, who held there were grounds to believe the allegations against her were credible under UAPA’s Section 43D. Since then, Fatima has sought bail in the Delhi High Court, with her petition now scheduled for November 25 before Justices Navin Chawla and Shailender Kaur.
The background of the case involves charges that the Delhi riots were orchestrated, including alleged property damage, disruption of essential services, and use of weapons. Prosecutors argue that the riots were strategically planned, with protests near significant mosques under the guise of secular demonstrations.
They cite a 2019 meeting involving activists, including Umar Khalid and Harsh Mander, where strategies to mitigate police action and internationalize the protests were discussed.
The prosecution’s case hinges on a “conspiracy of silence” theory, alleging that the DPSG Group facilitated coordinated communication among the accused. The FIR lists charges under UAPA, the Arms Act, the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, and various sections of the Indian Penal Code.
In 2021, the main chargesheet was filed against activists including Devangana Kalita, Natasha Narwal, Asif Iqbal Tanha, and Gulfisha Fatima, with a subsequent supplementary chargesheet in November implicating Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam.
