Giving an “unpalatable” speech cannot by itself attract the rigours of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), the accused in the 2020 Delhi riots conspiracy case told the Supreme Court on Tuesday (December 9, 2025), as they concluded arguments on their bail pleas.
Senior advocate Siddharth Dave, appearing for Sharjeel Imam, apprised a Bench of Justices Aravind Kumar and N.V. Anjaria that the prosecution’s case rests almost entirely on speeches delivered by Mr. Imam, which, he contended, cannot ipso facto be construed as a “terrorist act” under Section 15 of the UAPA.
“The charge is not whether my speech individually falls foul of Section 15. The question is whether the speeches were conspiratorial in nature. If they were not, then Section 15 cannot be invoked,” he said.
Mr. Dave further pointed out that the Delhi Police had registered nearly 750 FIRs relating to the riots, yet Mr. Imam was not named in any of them. “This is a peculiar FIR where an alleged conspiracy is prosecuted separately from the actual acts said to have been committed pursuant to that conspiracy....I do not appear in any of the 750 FIRs. Is a speech, by itself, conspiratorial in nature?” he asked.
Along with Mr. Imam’s plea, the Bench was also hearing the bail pleas of activists Umar Khalid, Gulfisha Fatima, Meeran Haider, Shifa-ur-Rehman, Mohd. Saleem Khan and Shadab Ahmed, all accused of conspiring to orchestrate the unrest and charged under the UAPA. They have assailed the Delhi High Court’s September 2 order denying them bail, which had characterised their alleged roles as “grave” and indicative of a coordinated conspiracy behind the riots that left 53 people dead and hundreds injured in the national capital.
