Fri Sep 12 04:36:19 UTC 2025: Okay, here’s a summary and a news article based on the provided text:
**Summary:**
The Indian Supreme Court is scheduled to hear bail petitions on Friday, September 12, 2025, for student activists Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam, Gulfisha Fatima, and Meeran Haider. These activists are challenging a Delhi High Court order that denied them bail in a case registered under the UAPA concerning the alleged conspiracy behind the February 2020 Delhi riots. The activists have been in custody since 2020. The High Court previously ruled the riots were a “premeditated conspiracy” and denied bail. Arguments for bail include the delay in the trial and parity with other co-accused who have been released. Umar Khalid has accused the Delhi police of fabricating evidence against him in the case.
**News Article:**
**Supreme Court to Hear Bail Pleas of Activists Implicated in 2020 Delhi Riots**
**New Delhi, September 12, 2025** – The Supreme Court is set to hear the bail petitions of student activists Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam, Gulfisha Fatima, and Meeran Haider today, September 12, 2025. The activists are challenging a Delhi High Court decision that denied them bail in connection with a case registered under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), stemming from allegations of conspiracy related to the February 2020 Delhi riots.
A Bench of Justices Aravind Kumar and N.V. Anjaria will preside over the hearing. The activists have been in custody as undertrials since 2020, awaiting trial.
The Delhi High Court previously rejected their bail pleas, stating that the riots were not a “regular protest” but a “premeditated, well-orchestrated conspiracy.” The court cited inflammatory speeches as evidence of inciting communal mobilization.
Defense lawyers are arguing for bail based on the prolonged delay in the trial and citing the precedent of bail granted to other co-accused individuals, including Natasha Narwal, Devangana Kalita, Asif Iqbal Tanha, and former Congress councillor Ishrat Jahan.
Umar Khalid, in a hearing prior to today’s Supreme Court session, accused the Delhi police of “fabricating evidence” to implicate him in the larger conspiracy case. His counsel argues that the FIR lacks foundation and that no direct evidence links Mr. Khalid to the commission of the alleged offenses.
The case remains a sensitive issue, raising concerns about freedom of speech and the application of the UAPA. The Supreme Court’s decision will be closely watched for its implications on the rights of the accused and the interpretation of the UAPA in cases involving public protests and alleged conspiracies.
First Piper 