The Supreme Court has clarified that the denial of bail to Abdul Khalid Saifi and Tasleem Ahmad in the Delhi riots case was based on their alleged roles in the violence, and not because Article 21 of the Constitution was treated as subordinate to other provisions. The bench, while granting interim bail to the two accused for a period of six months, subject to certain conditions, emphasized that the fundamental right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 remains paramount.
Interim Bail Granted with Conditions
The Supreme Court bench, comprising Justices, granted interim bail to Abdul Khalid Saifi and Tasleem Ahmad, who have been in custody in connection with the 2020 Delhi riots. The bail is valid for six months, and the accused must comply with conditions set by the court, including surrendering their passports and reporting to the police station periodically.
Court's Observations on Article 21
In its order, the Supreme Court noted that the earlier rejection of bail by lower courts was not a reflection of Article 21 being subordinated. Instead, the decision was based on the specific allegations against the accused and their alleged involvement in the riots. The court reiterated that Article 21 cannot be suspended or treated as inferior to any other constitutional provision.
Background of the Case
The Delhi riots of February 2020 resulted in widespread violence, leading to numerous deaths and injuries. Several individuals were arrested, including Saifi and Ahmad, who were charged with serious offenses. The Supreme Court's interim bail order comes after prolonged legal proceedings.
The court has directed the accused to not tamper with evidence or influence witnesses. The case will be heard again after six months for further consideration.
