Delhi riots were 'choreographed' conspiracy for ‘regime change’, Umar Khalid among orchestrators: Police

Umar Khalid

The Delhi Police told the Supreme Court on Tuesday that the 2020 riots in the capital were not spontaneous protests but a "well-crafted, orchestrated, preplanned, choreographed" conspiracy aimed at a "final regime change", explicitly naming former student activist Umar Khalid and other accused as being behind the plot.

The sensational claims, reported by TOI, were made as the police vigorously defended the denial of bail under the stringent Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) to six individuals: Gulfisha Fatima, Sharjeel Imam, Meeran Haider, Umar Khalid, Shifa Ur Rehman and Mohd Saleem Khan.

The arguments were presented by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, who was contesting bail pleas for six accused under the stringent Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA). Mehta sought to counter the defence's narrative that the violence was spontaneous, asserting instead that it was a deliberate attack on the nation's sovereignty.

"A narrative has been built inside the court and outside by them, but the facts are different. Your lordships have been told that they were protesting and it resulted in communal riots. It is a myth that has to be busted," Mehta told the bench, as reported by TOI. He implicated the accused, including former student activist Umar Khalid, in delivering "provocative speeches with communal overtones" that he suggested were central to the orchestrated unrest.

Shifting the focus to the pace of the ongoing trial, the government also refuted claims that the police were responsible for delays. Additional Solicitor General SV Raju, who took over the arguments, presented trial court orders to support the state's position. He stated that while the matter was listed for hearing on charges in September 2023, the process only began a year later, in September 2024, because the accused were not prepared to argue.

According to the ASG's submission, detailed in the TOI report, "A bare perusal of the order sheets clearly indicates that counsels for the accused have taken many adjournments during the course of arguments on charges."

He emphasised that the "inordinate delay in trial was not due to the inaction of the respondent agency or the trial court," noting that only 11 of the 18 accused have so far completed their arguments on charges.

This stance directly countered earlier submissions by Khalid, who had informed the apex court that the police took four years to complete their investigation. He had also contended that the hearing on charges was deferred on multiple occasions due to the non-availability of either the presiding officer or the public prosecutor.