The Supreme Court has denied bail to activists Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam, who have been jailed for over five years for their alleged roles in the 2020 Delhi riots. However, the court has granted bail to five co-accused in the same case: Gulfisha Fatima, Meeran Haider, Shifa Ur Rehman, Mohd Saleem Khan, and Shadab Ahmed.

Khalid and Imam, along with others, had challenged a Delhi High Court order that denied them bail in a case under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), related to the alleged "larger conspiracy" behind the 2020 Delhi riots. The case pertains to the violence that broke out in North East Delhi in February 2020, amidst protests against the Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA). The riots resulted in over 50 deaths and widespread damage.

Justices Aravind Kumar and N V Anjaria drew a distinction between the roles of Khalid and Imam compared to the other co-accused. The court stated that the "record discloses that appellants are not on equal footing when it comes to culpability," indicating that Imam and Khalid are in a "qualitatively different footing" compared to the others.

Umar Khalid, a former Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) student leader, was arrested in connection with his alleged role in the 2020 Delhi riots. He faces charges of criminal conspiracy under the UAPA. Sharjeel Imam was arrested before the communal violence for allegedly delivering inflammatory speeches against the CAA and the National Register of Citizens (NRC). A video was cited in which Imam is allegedly planning to "paralyse Delhi" through a "chakka jam" by cutting off essential supplies. The Delhi Police have argued that Imam's speeches can be attributed to the other accused and used as evidence against them. They also contended that all participants are liable for each other's actions in a conspiracy.

Advocate Salim Naved, the lawyer for Gulfisha Fatima, argued that the accused have been in custody for five years without the trial progressing, which he attributed to the police and prosecution. He further argued that there is no case against any of the accused. Senior advocate Siddharth Dave, representing Imam, argued that his client's speeches alone cannot constitute the offense of criminal conspiracy in the riots case.

The Delhi Police have maintained that the riots were not spontaneous but rather an "orchestrated, pre-planned, and well-designed" attack on India's sovereignty. They argued that it was a "regime change operation" executed under the guise of "peaceful protest". The Supreme Court had reserved its verdict on December 10, after hearing arguments from all parties involved.