The Delhi High Court has once again rejected the bail plea of Umar Khalid and his companions, holding that delay in trial cannot be a valid ground for bail. This decision further undermines the Supreme Court’s celebrated principle that “bail is the rule and jail is the exception”. In practice, particularly when the accused are Muslims, the principle seems to operate in reverse: Jail becomes the rule, and bail the exception.

For Umar Khalid, this marks the fifth failure in his pursuit of bail. The trial court dismissed his plea, followed by the High Court. When the matter reached the Supreme Court, the case lingered for nine months across 14 hearings, with adjournment after adjournment. Senior advocate Kapil Sibal even pleaded that he needed just 20 minutes to argue, yet the court did not accommodate him.

In normal practice, if a hearing is postponed in the Supreme Court, the case is reassigned to a new bench. Yet, in Khalid’s case, the matter repeatedly appeared before the same judge for six consecutive hearings. Faced with this, his lawyers eventually withdrew the plea, resolving to try their luck again in the lower courts. Since bench allocation is determined by the Chief Justice, it is evident that this repeated assignment was not a coincidence. Now, following the High........

© Indian Express