New Delhi: Umar Khalid, a doctoral scholar and activist, has now marked 1,500 days in Tihar Jail without trial, following his arrest in September 2020 related to the Delhi riots. This prolonged pre-trial detention raises significant concerns about judicial consistency and treatment of dissent in India.

According to Kashmir Media Service, Khalid was arrested under charges of being the principal orchestrator of the riots that coincided with the protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act and the National Register of Citizens, which critics claim are anti-Muslim. These charges have kept him detained under stringent conditions typically reserved for severe allegations.

The length of Khalid’s detention without bail has ignited debates among activists, legal experts, and the public. Banojyotsna Lahiri, Khalid’s partner, pointed out that the duration of his detention is equivalent to what one would normally spend on significant life achievements, such as completing an academic degree or advancing a professional career.

Comparatively, figures like Trinamool Congress leader Anubrata Mondal and AAP leader Satyendar Jain have been released on bail after similar periods of confinement for different charges, highlighting potential inconsistencies in the judicial process. A senior BJP leader has even stated that bail should be more commonly applied, further emphasizing the irregularity in Khalid’s case.

Khalid has faced repeated rejections of his bail applications a total of 14 times with denials from both sessions court and the Delhi High Court. His latest appeal to the Supreme Court has been pending since early April 2023.

Legal and civil rights voices, including lawyer-activist Prashant Bhushan and activist Kavita Krishnan, have criticized the charges against Khalid as being excessively harsh and called his ongoing imprisonment without trial a critical test of democratic principles. The use of the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA) in his case has been particularly contentious, given its severe restrictions on bail for defendants.

The debate over Khalid’s extended detention continues to resonate, drawing attention to broader issues regarding how the judiciary handles cases of dissent and the application of anti-terrorism laws in India.