Five Years Without Trial, Hope or Justice: The Silencing of Dissent in India

“When the media gets weaker, democracy gets weak. So, more than me being a victim of what the media has been doing, I think democracy is the victim, and that’s something we all should be concerned about.”

— Umar Khalid, commenting on the media trial against him during a MediaRumble discussion in 2020

“Tahe dil se meri aap logo se ek appeal hai, ahinsa, satyagrah, ye do hamare sabse bade hathiyaar hai. Mahatma Gandhi ne humko ye hathiyaar diye the. Na ahinsa ko chhodenge, na satyagrah ko chhodenge.”

— Umar Khalid, speech from Azad Maidan, Mumbai, 27 September 2019, during one of many protests he attended.

The speech Umar Khalid gave in Amravati (which is alleged to have contributed to the 2020 Delhi Riots) highlighted how protests began after police violence in universities and were inspired by the Shaheen Bagh peaceful sit-in protest: a non-violent, 24×7 movement largely led by Muslim women. His speech also urged the government to engage in talks with protesters, but these requests were initially ignored. Only when protests began spreading nationwide did Home Minister Amit Shah offer discussions. Umar, however, called for open talks at Shaheen Bagh and other protest sites rather than confined spaces. He also recalled how colonial rulers jailed freedom fighters under sedition cases.

Umar’s latest letter from jail has renewed attention on him and fellow protesters, who have now been arrested together for five years without hope of trial or bail.

History of the Case

1. Who Are the Accused?

Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam, Athar Khan, Gulfisha Fatima, Meeran Haider, Shifa-ur-Rehman, Mohd Saleem Khan, Shadab Ahmed, and Abdul Khalid Saifi are nine former Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) students arrested in 2020 due to protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) and the National Register of Citizens (NRC). On February 24, 2020, violence broke out between CAA supporters and protesters, leaving 53 people dead, 200 injured, and many displaced in Northeast Delhi.

Earlier, on February 9, 2016, students attempted to organize an event commemorating the hanging of Afzal Guru, the 2001 Parliament attack convict. Permission was canceled after RSS-affiliated Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad (ABVP) complained to the Vice-Chancellor, alleging that “anti-India slogans” were raised. Umar Khalid, JNUSU president Kanhaiya Kumar, and Anirban Bhattacharya were booked under sedition charges. These arrests further fueled protests at JNU, which many argued were politically motivated and an assault on freedom of expression.

One organizing committee member told The Hindu that the program was a cultural evening meant to question the Supreme Court’s functioning and highlight the grievances of Kashmiri citizens and their democratic right to self-determination. In a democratic republic, dissent should not be suppressed. Kanhaiya denied that JNU students raised anti-national slogans. A month later, he was released on bail, while Umar and Anirban were released on six-month bail a few days afterward. This is widely seen as the start of JNU being labeled “anti-national.”

2. Alleged Charges Against Them

In November 2020, Delhi Police filed FIR 59/2020 on Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam, accusing them of conspiring and instigating the 2020 Delhi riots. The charges under the Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1980, included rioting (Sections 147, 148), murder (Section 302), and unlawful assembly (Section 149). Under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), 1967, charges include unlawful activities (Section 13), terrorist activities (Sections 16–18), and conspiracy (Section 18). Under the Arms Act, 1959, they were charged under Sections 25 and 27.

In March 2021, the Delhi Police added IPC charges of sedition (Section 124A) and promotion of enmity between groups (Section 153A). In October 2020, another FIR (101/2020) was filed on vandalism and arson in Khajuri Khas, Northeast Delhi. In April 2021, Khalid got bail for FIR 101’s charges but not for FIR 59, and no trial has started for the latter.

Khalid’s advocate, Trideep Pais, argued that no prima facie case was established due to contradictory witness statements and inconsistent claims, while prosecutors accused Khalid of attempting to undermine government authority and facilitate violent protests, citing WhatsApp group messages as evidence of a larger conspiracy. Some right-wing media accused Umar of visiting Pakistan, but he does not possess a passport.

3. Timeline

• 14 September 2020: Umar Khalid arrested.

• 24 September 2020: Sent to judicial custody till 22 October 2020.

• 22 October 2020: Complained of 24-hour solitary confinement; judge ordered he should not be punished for voicing grievances.

• 22 November 2020: Chargesheet filed against Umar and Sharjeel.

• 15 March 2021: Umar summoned regarding 2016 sedition case.

• 18 February 2022: Presented in handcuffs despite court orders.

• 14 March 2022: Filed bail plea.

• 21–24 March 2022: Bail plea deferred and denied.

• 23–25 May 2022: Advocate Pais pointed out misrepresentation of facts in chargesheet and mischaracterization of Umar as a “terrorist.”

• 30 May 2022: Witness statements in the chargesheet noted as contradictory or identical.

• 12 December 2022: Granted 7-day interim bail for sister’s wedding, under gag order.

• 6 April 2023: Filed Special Leave Petition (SLP) in Supreme Court against Delhi High Court bail rejection.

• 17 August 2023: SLP dropped.

• 12 October 2023: Hearing adjourned for lack of time.

• July–December 2023: Bail plea adjourned 10 times due to judge reassignments and counsel requests.

• 10–31 January 2024: Bail adjourned multiple times.

• 14 February 2024: Umar withdrew bail application.

• 18 December 2024: Granted 7-day interim bail, again with gag order.

• 2 September 2025: Court dismissed argument that extended jail period was unwarranted, citing 3,000-page chargesheet and 30,000 pages of electronic evidence.

• 10–12 September 2025: Case adjourned at Supreme Court.

Six bail attempts in total — three in Sessions Court, two at Delhi High Court, one at Supreme Court — all denied.

Main Reasons Bail Was Denied

The stringent provisions of UAPA make bail difficult. The court stated:

“It becomes the arduous task of the Court to strike a balance between individual rights and the interests of the nation, as well as the safety and security of the general public at large. Therefore, these appeals do not succeed.”

Senior Advocate Colin Gonsalves noted that UAPA precedents reflect a politicized judiciary. Kapil Sibal, representing Umar, explained that the “terrorist activities” sections under UAPA do not actually apply, as protests are defined as the only alleged acts. Umar was not even in Delhi during the protest, and the conspiracy is undefined. Sibal questioned how Umar endangered state security and highlighted precedents where bail was granted under serious UAPA charges.

Human Rights Violations

Arbitrary arrests under UAPA violate multiple constitutional rights:

1. Article 14: Equality before law; selective targeting of Muslim students.

2. Article 15: No discrimination based on religion, caste, sex, etc.

3. Article 19(1)(a): Freedom of speech and expression; Umar’s Amravati speech labeled “terrorist conspiracy.”

4. Article 19(1)(b): Right to peaceful assembly; anti-CAA protests labeled anti-national.

5. Article 21: Right to life and personal liberty, including fair trial; five years without trial.

6. Article 22(1): Protection against arbitrary arrest; UAPA limits bail opportunities.

Umar Khalid’s Letter from Tihar

“There is something about captivity that makes one feel like a state of somewhere between life & death. Nurturing hope in jail is a risky business… Five years have passed, half a decade. That’s time enough for people to complete their PhDs, fall in love, marry, have kids, and watch the world change… Will I survive outside with my name plastered as anti-national?”

He reflects on hope, despair, and waiting, drawing parallels to Dostoyevsky’s The House of the Dead, noting how imprisonment’s realities remain unchanged over 150 years.

Public Reaction

The rollout of CAA and NRC sparked nationwide protests, with celebrities like Swara Bhasker, Taapsee Pannu, Dia Mirza, Manoj Bajpayee, Richa Chadha, Deepika Padukone, and others speaking out. Despite their larger media presence, none faced charges for inciting unrest, highlighting selective legal action.

A terrorist can get a trial, but protesting students cannot. Are they political prisoners? Protesting is a constitutional right, yet dissenters like Umar face a five-year jail term. Meanwhile, politicians openly spreading hate face no consequences. As journalist Darab Farooqui puts it:

“You know why Umar Khalid is not getting bail? Because his name is Umar Khalid.”

---