NO EASY ABSOLUTIONS

The Supreme Court's refusal to grant bail to Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam marks another decisive moment in the long and deeply polarising chapter of the 2020 Delhi riots.

- 

The court’s reasoning rests on a powerful legal anchor within the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, which places a heavy burden on anyone seeking release once a prima facie case appears to exist. That legal threshold now feels less like a technical provision and more like a grim reminder of the seriousness with which the State continues to treat the riots. The court believes prosecution material points toward structured planning, strategic mobilisation, and direction that cannot be brushed aside as spontaneous chaos. That framing changes the narrative from an eruption of anger to something colder, more deliberate and deeply worrying. The bail granted to some others in the same cluster of cases complicates the emotional landscape further, showing the judiciary is not acting in sweeping generalisations, but assessing individuals differently even within the same violent event. Yet the continued incarceration of Khalid and Imam stands out, not only for itslegal significance but for the layered political, social and emotional tensions it revives.