The Supreme Court’s recent refusal to grant bail to activists Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam in the 2020 northeast Delhi riots case immediately drew reactions from across the political spectrum. A bench comprising Justices Aravind Kumar and NV Anjari had rejected their pleas, citing prima facie evidence against them and distinguishing their cases from other accused, who were granted bail. The verdict followed their challenge to a Delhi High Court order from September, which had also denied them bail.

Here is a summary of how political leaders responded:

BJP Leaders Praise SC Order
BJP spokesperson Shehzad Poonawalla held a press briefing accusing the Congress of “sympathising” with Khalid and Imam. “The ‘Tukde Tukde’ gang is pained by the decision. Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam were not merely receiving sympathies from the Congress and its ecosystem, but also letters from abroad,” Poonawalla said, referring to a letter by American lawmakers urging a “fair and timely trial” and a note from New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani handed to Khalid’s parents during a recent US visit. He asked if the Congress would apologise for its support.

Delhi Minister Manjinder Singh Sirsa also welcomed the order, claiming that rioters were “rewarded” under previous Congress governments but will now “stay in jail.” “Rioters should get harsh punishment. During the Congress rule, the rioters were rewarded…During the rule of the BJP, rioters will stay in jail only. I thank the Supreme Court for sending this message,” he said.

Delhi minister Kapil Mishra termed the verdict “legally correct,” asserting it confirmed that the riots were part of a well-planned conspiracy. “The riots in Delhi were carried out after careful planning. Today, the Supreme Court’s verdict has also endorsed this understanding, confirming that these riots did not happen suddenly but were carried out after a long period of preparation,” Mishra told PTI.

Congress Voices ‘Fundamental Right’ Concerns
Congress MP Imran Masood declined to comment on the SC order itself but reminded that bail is a fundamental right. “The Supreme Court has repeatedly stated that bail is a fundamental right, so if it is a fundamental right of a person, then that should also be considered,” he told ANI.

Karnataka Congress leader and minister Priyank Kharge criticised the judicial system on X (formerly Twitter), juxtaposing the bail granted to convicted rapists with the denial to Khalid and Imam. He posted a visual listing Unnao rape convict Kuldeep Singh Sengar under the “bail” column and Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam under “jail,” highlighting perceived inconsistencies in granting pre-trial relief. However, Kharge’s post was made before the Supreme Court read out the verdict.

CPI(M) Flags ‘Natural Justice’ Violations
The Communist Party of India (Marxist) criticised the court’s decision as violating the principles of natural justice. “The Supreme Court’s denial of bail to #UmarKhalid and #SharjeelImam, who have spent over five years in jail under the draconian #UAPA without trial or conviction, is against the principles of natural justice. Prolonged pre-trial incarceration violates the fundamental principle that bail is the rule, not jail, and undermines the constitutional right to liberty and a speedy trial. The continued use of UAPA to target dissenting voices reflects a disturbing pattern of repression and selective justice. We reiterate our demand for the release of all political prisoners,” the party posted on X.

Ex-Law Minister Flags Long Incarceration
Former Union law minister Ashwani Kumar acknowledged the Supreme Court’s reasoning but highlighted the issue of prolonged imprisonment. “The libertarians in this country today would be most unhappy because Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam have been in jail for a very long time, and the Supreme Court’s own judgment says that long incarceration itself should be a consideration for the grant of bail. After all, there is no recompense for liberty once lost,” he told ANI.

Why the Supreme Court Denied Bail
The Supreme Court’s verdict emphasised that Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam stood on a “qualitatively different footing” compared to other accused in terms of prosecution and evidence. “This court is satisfied that the prosecution material disclosed a prima facie allegation against the appellants Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam… This stage of proceedings does not justify their enlargement on bail,” the bench stated.

Both Khalid and Imam were earlier denied bail by the Delhi High Court and moved the Supreme Court challenging that order. They face charges under the stringent Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) and provisions of the Indian Penal Code in connection with the February 2020 riots in northeast Delhi, which left 53 people dead and over 700 injured.

The Supreme Court’s ruling has sparked a mix of support and criticism, reflecting the deep political and social fault lines surrounding the case, the use of UAPA, and the debate over prolonged pre-trial detention in high-profile cases.