Delhi Police Calls 2020 Riots A ‘Regime Change Operation’ In Supreme Court Affidavit

The Delhi Police has filed a detailed 189-page affidavit before the Supreme Court opposing the bail pleas of Sharjeel Imam, Umar Khalid, Miran Haider, and Gulafsha Fatima, among others, in connection with the 2020 Delhi riots case under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA).

In its affidavit, the police alleged that the February 2020 violence was not a spontaneous act of protest but a premeditated conspiracy — a ‘regime change operation’ designed to undermine India’s internal peace and international reputation.

The document claimed that concrete evidence established that the riots were orchestrated with the objective of attacking India’s integrity and sovereignty under the guise of anti-CAA protests.

The affidavit further accused Sharjeel Imam and Umar Khalid of deliberately delaying the trial process, asserting that such conduct amounted to an abuse of legal procedures.

It stated that the accused intentionally prolonged proceedings and hindered the course of justice, and therefore, did not deserve bail.

The police maintained that the use of the CAA protests as a front to instigate violence represented a dangerous attempt to weaponise public sentiment against the government.

It added that granting bail in such cases would set a negative precedent in matters concerning national security.

Court’s Observations and Next Hearing

During an earlier hearing, a bench comprising Justice Aravind Kumar and Justice NV Anjaria questioned the delay in filing the Delhi Police’s response and remarked that filing replies in every bail matter was not mandatory.

The Supreme Court has now scheduled the next hearing for 31 October, directing the Additional Solicitor General to present a comprehensive argument.

Nine accused — including Sharjeel Imam, Umar Khalid, Mohammad Saleem Khan, Shifa-ur-Rehman, Athar Khan, Miran Haider, Khalid Saifi, and Gulafsha Fatima — filed bail pleas after the Delhi High Court denied them bail.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Delhi Police, contended that delays in the trial cannot serve as grounds for bail in cases involving national security under the UAPA.

He argued that the riots were not isolated incidents but part of a ‘coordinated and organised conspiracy’ intended to tarnish India’s global image.

Mehta further alleged that Imam and Khalid had deliberately chosen specific dates and methods to incite unrest, thereby attracting international attention to defame the country.

He asserted that such ‘anti-national’ acts deprived the accused of any moral or legal right to seek bail.

Background of the 2020 Delhi Riots

The case pertains to the communal violence that erupted in northeast Delhi in February 2020, resulting in 53 deaths and injuries to over 700 people.

Among the victims, 38 were Muslim and 15 were Hindu. The investigation, which the police described as one of the most comprehensive to date, included the recording of 58 witness statements under Section 164 of the CrPC.

The Supreme Court will examine whether prolonged incarceration without trial justifies bail under the UAPA, a decision that could impact similar national security cases.

Also Read: Supreme Court Rejects Bihar Chief Secretary’s Plea For Exemption In Stray Dog Case