Delhi Court asks Delhi Police why they seek production of Umar Khalid, Khalid Saifi in handcuffs.

A Delhi court has asked the Delhi Police to explain why they are seeking the production of Umar Khalid and Khalid Saifi in "handcuffs in both hands from the backside" in a Delhi riots event, claiming that the applications for such a request were "absolutely devoid of motives." "The instant applications are devoid of any reason(s), causing the senior police officer(s) to decide to pass such an application" (s). This Court is unable to accept the grant of prayer(s) due to a lack of material/reason(s) in these applications. Let report(s) be called from DCP (Special Cell), who is investigating case FIR No.59/2020, PS Crime Branch (UAPA case), and DCP, 3rd BN, DAP to communicate the reasons for filing such application(s) before this Court." On these applications, a report from Superintendent Jail is also requested.

As "high-risk inmates," Umar and Khalid were ordered to be produced in "handcuffs in both hands from the backside" by the Incharge, Lock-Up, Karkardooma District Courts, Delhi. These applications were allegedly submitted after a senior police officer(s) of the Delhi Police decided in the case. When asked about the definition of "high-risk inmate" and where it has been identified, the Special Public Prosecutor "submits that he was not informed of the instant applications and as such, he could not take orders in the matter," according to the Court.

The Court opined that the plea for handcuffing was entirely devoid of grounds because both Umar and Khalid had been given bail in the matter and it was assumed that the orders were in the knowledge of senior police officers of the Delhi Police. The court added that the other matter in which the two became involved, the UAPA FIR, was not before it. The case has been rescheduled for a hearing on May 6. On February 24, 2020, the Khajuri Khas FIR was filed in connection with the violence that erupted near Chand Bagh Pulia on the main Karawal Nagar Road. The case revolves around rioting that occurred at or near the home of the key accuser, Tahir Hussain. The Court said that charging Umar in this case on the grounds of "such negligible content" was unwarranted when granting him bail in the case.