![\"Delhi](\"https:\/\/static.toiimg.com\/thumb\/msid-132758462,imgsize-105686,width-400,height-225,resizemode-75\/the-delhi-high-court-has-sought-responses-from-the-delhi-police-regarding-umar-khalids-bail-appeal.jpg\" "\\"The")
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\nNEW DELHI: The Delhi high court<\/a> on Friday sought responses from the Delhi Police<\/a> on activist and former JNU scholar Umar Khalid’s appeal.The appeal challenges the trial court’s July 4 order rejecting his third regular bail plea in the alleged larger conspiracy case linked to the 2020 North-East Delhi riots.A Division Bench of Justice Prathiba M Singh and Justice Vikas Mahajan also issued notice on Khalid’s application seeking interim bail and fixed August 27 for hearing both the appeal and the interim bail plea.Senior advocate Trideep Pais, appearing for Khalid, told the court that the appeal challenges the trial court’s order dismissing his third regular bail application.Additional solicitor general SV Raju represented the Delhi Police.Khalid has sought interim bail pending the Supreme Court’s decision on the legal question of whether prolonged incarceration and delay in trial can override the restrictions on grant of bail under Section 43D(5) of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA).In his appeal, Khalid argued that despite more than six months having passed since the Supreme Court rejected his earlier bail plea on January 5, 2026, there has been no meaningful progress in the trial, news agency ANI reported.He submitted that arguments on framing of charges are still underway and that he has remained in custody since September 2020.On July 4, additional sessions Judge Sameer Bajpai of the Karkardooma Court dismissed the regular bail pleas of Umar Khalid and co-accused Sharjeel Imam.The trial court held that the fresh bail applications were not maintainable in view of the Supreme Court’s earlier order, which had allowed them to renew their bail pleas only after the examination of the protected witnesses relied upon by the prosecution or after one year, whichever occurred earlier.The prosecution opposed the bail pleas, contending that there had been no substantial change in circumstances since the Supreme Court’s previous order, ANI reported.The case stems from FIR 59\/2020 registered by the Delhi Police Special Cell over the alleged larger conspiracy behind the February 2020 North-East Delhi riots. The trial remains at the stage of arguments on framing of charges, with charges yet to be framed.The Delhi high court has also listed co-accused Sharjeel Imam’s appeal against the rejection of his bail plea for hearing on August 27.(With agency inputs)<\/div>\n