LAWYER SIBLING LOGO (1)
  • Home
  • Blogs
  • News
  • Updates
  • Constitution
    • Constitutional Laws
  • Laws
    • Civil Law
    • Criminal Law
    • Family Law
    • Real Estate Law
    • Business Law
    • Cyber & IT Law
    • Employee Law
    • Finance Law
    • International Law
  • Special Act
    • Motor Vehicles Act (MV Act)
    • Consumer Protection Act
    • Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Act (NDPS)
    • The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO)
  • Bare Act

Delhi riots 2020: High Court reserves verdict on bail plea of Tasleem Ahmed

09/07/2025BlogNo Comments

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday reserved its verdict on the bail petition of Tasleem Ahmed, accused of the larger conspiracy leading to riots in the North-East region of Delhi in 2020.

The Division Bench of Justice Subramonium Prasad and Justice Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar reserved its judgment after hearing arguments from both parties.

Advocate Mehmood Pracha, representing Ahmed, on Tuesday made arguments on the grounds of delay in the trial, saying that he did not take even a single day’s adjournment before the trial court and concluded arguments on charge on a single day within 10-15 minutes. Yet, he had been languishing in jail for the past five years.

Appearing for the Delhi Police, SPP Amit Prasad today submitted that delay alone could not be a reason for the grant of bail while dealing with Section 43D(4) of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act.

Relying on the Supreme Court verdict in State of Andhra Pradesh vs Mohd. Hussain and Vernon vs State of Maharashtra, Prasad said facts could not be divorced when bail was sought on the grounds of delay.

He further submitted that interim bail could not be granted by the High Court while hearing an appeal rejecting the grant of bail by the trial court, in absence of emergent reasons.

Prasad said Ahmed, as an accused, could not divert himself from the overall conspiracy. If bail was granted to the petitioner on the grounds of delay alone, then it would become very easy for other co-accused to get relief on the same ground.

Pracha then said that even if the Court passed an order for a day-to-day trial, it would not be possible for the trial courts to do so due to the workload. They were not supercomputers, they were judges.

Forget Ahmed’s right to speedy trial, even his bail plea had not been adjudicated. The petitioner was compelled to give up his rights even when arguing for bail due to the burden. This was the effect of over-burdening of the system. If Ahmed took even one adjournment, his bail may be cancelled, added Pracha.

The post Delhi riots 2020: High Court reserves verdict on bail plea of Tasleem Ahmed appeared first on India Legal.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Recent Posts

  • Rajasthan tailor murder: Delhi High Court stays release of Udaipur Files
  • Electoral roll revision in Bihar: Supreme Court directs Election Commission to accept Aadhaar card as acceptable citizenship document
  • Delhi riots 2020: High Court reserves judgment on bail petitions of Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam, others
  • Will the NASDAQ Dogecoin Trust Redefine Market Legality?
  • Bike Loan Eligibility Criteria, Documents Required, and Application Process

Recent Comments

  1. Phone Tracking In India - lawyer Sibling on The Constitution of INDIA
  2. Section 437A of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) - lawyer Sibling on The Constitution of INDIA
  3. The Evolution of Indian Penal Code 1860: Key Provisions and Relevance Today - lawyer Sibling on The Constitution of INDIA

Follow us for more

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
YouTube
Instagram
DisclaimerPrivacy PolicyTerms and Conditions
All Rights Reserved © 2023
  • Login
  • Sign Up
Forgot Password?
Lost your password? Please enter your username or email address. You will receive a link to create a new password via email.