In a significant legal development in the ongoing 2020 Delhi riots case, an accused, Salim Malik alias Munna, has filed a fresh bail application before a Delhi court, seeking release on the grounds of parity. His plea comes just days after the Supreme Court of India granted bail to five co-accused in the same “larger conspiracy” case, a decision that has re-energized legal strategies for those still incarcerated. Malik’s application, which emphasizes that his alleged role is similar to those recently granted relief by the apex court, will be heard by Additional Sessions Judge Sameer Bajpai, placing the spotlight once again on the complex legal battles surrounding the communal violence.
Malik’s bail plea, submitted to the Delhi court, contends that he faces charges akin to those recently granted bail by the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court, on January 5, 2026, ordered the release of five individuals – Gulfisha Fatima, Meeran Haider, Shifa-ur-Rehman, Mohd. Saleem Khan, and Shadab Ahmad – who are also accused in the extensive conspiracy case related to the February 2020 riots in Northeast Delhi. This apex court ruling has become a pivotal point for other accused, including Malik, who argue for similar consideration based on the principle of parity in criminal jurisprudence.
The principle of parity, a cornerstone of fair judicial process, dictates that similarly situated accused individuals facing comparable charges under similar circumstances should receive similar treatment concerning bail. Malik’s application argues that the prosecution’s case against him positions him as a “local operative” involved in protest meetings at the Chand Bagh site, a role he asserts is analogous to that of co-accused Mohd. Saleem Khan, who was among those granted bail by the Supreme Court. This argument aims to leverage the Supreme Court’s recent nuanced differentiation of roles among the accused, where some were identified as having “subsidiary or facilitative” involvement rather than a central, directorial role in the alleged conspiracy.
The 2020 Delhi riots, which erupted in the national capital in February of that year, led to widespread violence, loss of life, and significant property damage. Investigations subsequently led to numerous arrests, with many accused, including Malik, being charged under the stringent provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) alongside various sections of the Indian Penal Code. The UAPA, a robust anti-terror law, imposes stringent conditions for bail, often making it challenging for accused persons to secure release during the trial phase.
However, the Supreme Court’s recent decision, while granting bail to five, concurrently denied relief to prominent activists Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam. The apex court explicitly stated that “all appellants do not stand on an equal footing as regards culpability,” drawing a clear distinction between those alleged to have played “central and formative roles” in conceptualizing and orchestrating the conspiracy (like Khalid and Imam) and those with “subsidiary or facilitative” involvement. This judicial clarification on the hierarchy of participation within the alleged conspiracy is central to Malik’s current plea.
Malik, who was reportedly one of the organizers and speakers at anti-Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) and National Register of Citizens (NRC) meetings, faces allegations of criminal conspiracy and involvement in an arson incident in Northeast Delhi’s Bhajanpura area. The charges against him, framed on July 24, 2023, underscore the gravity of the accusations. Despite the seriousness of the charges, his legal team is pressing for bail, highlighting the prolonged incarceration and the precedent set by the Supreme Court’s recent order.
The bail conditions imposed by the Supreme Court on the five released co-accused were stringent, including furnishing a personal bond of ₹2 lakh with two local sureties, remaining within the National Capital Territory of Delhi, surrendering passports, marking attendance twice a week before the Crime Branch of Delhi Police, and refraining from contacting witnesses or participating in protests or public gatherings. Should Malik be granted bail, it is anticipated that similar rigorous conditions would be imposed to ensure compliance and prevent any obstruction of justice.
The ongoing legal proceedings underscore the complexities of adjudicating cases stemming from large-scale communal violence, particularly when anti-terror laws are invoked. The Delhi courts continue to navigate the delicate balance between upholding individual liberty, ensuring a fair trial, and addressing the serious allegations of conspiracy and violence. Malik’s bail application is another chapter in this protracted legal saga, with its outcome potentially influencing other pending bail pleas in the Delhi riots cases and further defining the application of the parity principle in such sensitive matters. The hearing scheduled for January 8, 2026, is therefore keenly watched by legal observers and the families of all involved.
#DelhiRiots #BailPlea #ParityPrinciple #IndianJudiciary #UAPA #SalimMalik #LegalUpdate #IndiaNews #JusticeSystem #DelhiCourts #Bhalakatha
