A Delhi court today granted bail to Activist and former JNU student Umar Khalid in a Delhi Riots case arising out of the FIR registered at Police Station Khajuri Khas (State v. Umar Khalid). Meanwhile, the court ruled that “The investigation in the matter is complete and charge sheet has already been filed. The trial in the matter is likely to take a long time. The applicant has been in judicial custody in the same matter since 01.10.2020. The applicant cannot be made to confine in jail for infinity merely on account of the fact that other persons who were part of the riotous mob have to be identified and arrested in the matter”. Further, Additional Sessions Judge Vinod Yadav of the Karkardooma Court directed Umar Khalid to install the Aarogya Setu app on his phone upon his release. The other bail conditions are that Umar Khalid shall not tamper with any evidence or influence any witness in any methodology and shall maintain peace and harmony in the spot. Khalid has also been directed to appear before the Court on every single date of hearing. Moreover, he is also required to furnish his mobile number to the SHO of Khajuri Khas Police Station upon his release from jail. He was granted bail on his furnishing a personal bond with the sum amount of Rs 20,000/- one surety of the like amount. The FIR was registered with respect to the violence that broke out in North East Delhi at the main Karawal Nagar Road, near Chand Bagh Pulia on February 24, 2020. The case covers the rioting which took place around the house of the main accused “Tahir Hussain”. Besides seeking bail on grounds of equality with other co-accused, Khalid argued that he had been falsely incriminated in the matter by the investigating agency on account of “political vendetta to snout the dissent”. It was submitted by the court that, neither he was present at the scene of the crime on the date of the incident nor was there any material on record to show that there was any meeting took place between Tahir Hussain and Khalid. The offense of “criminal conspiracy” was already a subject matter of another FIR and therefore, Khalid could not be prosecuted for the same offense twice, it was submitted by the court.