2026-01-01 Justice For All welcomes the congressional letter to the Embassy of India regarding the…
Statement on denial of bail to Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam
Jan 6, 2026
Justice For All is deeply dismayed by the denial of bail to Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam by India’s Supreme Court. Of seven applicants considered by the court, five have been granted bail. Justice For All is encouraged by this partial granting of bail and remains hopeful that the Indian judiciary will show independence in bringing justice for all of the accused.
Umar Khalid & Sharjeel Imam, two activists that are detained under India’s draconian Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA) have been denied bail while awaiting trial by India’s Supreme Court. Both were detained during protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act, which has a religious factor in granting Indian citizenship to applicants from neighboring countries. At the time there were clashes between religious factions in the capital, Delhi. Khalid & Imam were arrested and charged with instigating rioting. The two have been in jail and have not yet been tried for the charges against them.
Five years is a long time for an accused to be brought to an actual trial, and yet, this was just a bail hearing. In the case of these two, several past judges and academics have said that there is no evidence to hold them on the charges that they have been accused of. Just a week ago, a group of US Congresspersons sent a letter to the Indian Embassy in Washington expressing concern over their prolonged pre-trial detention. Pre-trial detentions have long been used by Indian authorities to hold people, and in some cases, to eventually release them after more than a decade of being held. This concept of process as punishment has been mainly used against activists and minority groups in India.
Justice For All has filed for recognition of Umar Khalid and others as Prisoners of Conscience by the bipartisan United States Commission of International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) and while listed as Victims of Religious Freedom, they have not been accepted as meeting the criteria of a Prisoner of Conscience.
