Ahmed, one of the petitioners, has been in custody since his arrest in FIR No. 59/2020 involving multiple IPC, UAPA, Arms Act and other charges linked to the 2020 Delhi riots conspiracy case. His bail applications have been rejected multiple times by the trial court, even as the Supreme Court earlier observed that he could seek parity with co-accused.
Saifi, who has spent over five years in custody, is also seeking parity with co-accused who were recently granted bail. He is accused of being part of multiple WhatsApp groups allegedly used for coordination during protests and of delivering inflammatory speeches, allegations he disputes.
In February the bench had issued notice on a plea filed by United Against Hate member Khalid Saifi, challenging the denial of bail by the Delhi High Court in a case alleging a larger conspiracy behind the 2020 Delhi riots, involving charges under the Indian Penal Code and the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA). The bench however had orally made it clear that Saifi cannot claim parity with the Supreme Court’s January 2026 judgment that granted bail to five co-accused in the same case.
Saifi had approached the apex court against the Delhi High Court’s September 2, 2025 order refusing him bail. In January, the Supreme Court granted bail to five accused, including Gulfisha Fatima, while rejecting bail pleas of Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam. Subsequently, the remaining accused, Tasleem Ahmed and now Khalid Saifi, move the Supreme Court. Notice had already been issued in Tasleem Ahmed’s petition, and Saifi’s plea was tagged with it. According to Saifi’s petition, he has spent nearly five years in custody and seeks bail on grounds of prolonged incarceration, claiming parity with those recently enlarged on bail by the Supreme Court.
Case Title: Tasleem Ahmed v. State and Abdul Khalid Saifi v. State (NCT of Delhi)
