Delhi riots case: Court issues release orders for fifth accused granted bail

New Delhi: A Delhi court on Thursday issued release orders for Shahdab Ahmed, who was granted bail along with four others by the Supreme Court in the 2020 Northeast Delhi riots conspiracy case.

Additional Sessions Judge Sameer Bajpai accepted the bail bond of Rs 2 lakh along with two local sureties of the like amount furnished by Khan and issued his release orders.

The release order was issued after Delhi Police submitted the verification report of all bond sureties and documents filed by the accused in the court.

The court noted that the accused had fulfilled all bail conditions imposed by the Supreme Court.

Earlier on Wednesday, the court ordered the Delhi Police to do the verification of documents and sureties submitted by accused.

Other four accused walked out of jail on Wednesday after a court here issued their release orders.

On Monday, the apex court had refused bail to activists Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam but granted the same to the five other accused, citing hierarchy of participation and saying all the accused in the case do not stand on the same footing.

There was a prima facie case against Khalid and Imam under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, the bench of Justices Aravind Kumar and N V Anjaria had said.

The top court on Monday imposed 11 conditions while granting bail to the five accused. If the conditions are violated, the trial court will be at liberty to cancel the bail after hearing the accused, apex the court had said.

It had ordered them to execute a personal bond of Rs 2 lakh with two local sureties of the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial court.

It also directed them to remain within the National Capital Territory of Delhi and not leave its territorial limits without prior permission of the trial court.

Any travel request shall disclose reasons, and such prayer/request shall be considered by the trial court strictly on its merits, the bench said.

Additionally, the court ordered the five accused to surrender their passports and directed them to furnish their current residential addresses, contact numbers, and e-mail addresses to the investigating officer and the trial court.

The respective counsel for the accused moved an application before the court seeking three to four days to submit the details.

They submitted that the mobile phones of the accused had not been functional for a long period and assured the court that the details would be furnished once access is restored.

The court also directed that the accused cannot directly or indirectly contact, influence, intimidate or attempt to contact any witness or any person connected to the proceedings, nor associate with or participate in the activities of any group or organisation linked to the present FIR.