_1.jpg)
.svg)
The scales of justice in India appear to have tilted toward a dark precedent as the Supreme Court, on January 5, 2026, once again slammed the doors of freedom on Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam. Despite spending five grueling years in pretrial detention—a period longer than many actual prison sentences—the apex court denied them bail while granting it to five other co-accused. By labeling Khalid and Imam as being on a "qualitatively different footing," the judiciary has effectively validated a narrative that transforms student activism into "intellectual terrorism." This ruling is not just a legal setback; it is a profound testament to the systemic targeting of vocal Muslim voices who dared to challenge the discriminatory Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA).
The Myth of Equality Before Law
The Supreme Court’s decision to bifurcate the accused based on a "hierarchy of participation" has sent shockwaves through the global human rights community. While activists like Gulfisha Fatima and Meeran Haider finally walked toward freedom, the court maintained that Khalid and Imam played a "central and formative role" in the 2020 Delhi riots. This conclusion comes despite the prosecution's inability to provide a single shred of evidence linking them to physical violence. The irony is staggering: in a case where 53 people died—the vast majority of them Muslims—the state has chosen to keep the most prominent Muslim intellectuals behind bars, while those who openly incited violence with slogans like "shoot the traitors" remain largely untouched by the UAPA’s draconian grip.
A Family Broken but Unbowed
Behind the cold legal battles are the human lives being systematically dismantled. Umar Khalid’s partner, Banojyotsna Lahiri, has spent the last half-decade as a pillar of resilience, navigating the labyrinth of Indian courts. Following the verdict, Khalid’s words to her were hauntingly resigned: “Ab yahi zindagi hai” (This is my life now). Even in his darkest hour, Khalid expressed joy for the five others who were granted bail, showing a level of grace that the state has failed to reciprocate. His parents, who recently met with U.S. lawmakers in Washington, have described the agonizing wait for a trial that never seems to begin, highlighting how the "process" itself has become the ultimate punishment.
The family of Sharjeel Imam in Bihar is equally devastated. His uncle, Arshad Imam, noted with heartbreak that every argument presented in court pointed toward Sharjeel’s innocence, yet the "labeling" of a brilliant scholar as a threat to national sovereignty persists. Sharjeel, an IIT and JNU alumnus, has been reduced to a target for his intellectual critiques, proving that in modern India, a Muslim’s degree or peaceful speech can be weaponized against them by a state that equates dissent with desertion.
The Global Outcry Against UAPA
The world is no longer silent about India's use of the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA) as a tool for political vendetta. Just days before this verdict, eight prominent U.S. lawmakers—including Pramila Jayapal and Rashida Tlaib—wrote to the Indian Ambassador, warning that Khalid’s detention contravenes international standards of due process. New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani also sent a handwritten note of solidarity to Khalid, acknowledging the weight of his words on bitterness and resilience. Amnesty International has been vocal, stating that this "derailment of justice" is emblematic of a broader pattern of repression. By holding Khalid and Imam for another year before they can even apply for bail again, the Indian judiciary has signaled that for some, the constitutional promise of "liberty" is a luxury, not a right.
The Trial That Never Was
The most chilling aspect of the Supreme Court’s 2026 ruling is the assertion that "delay in trial is not a trump card." This statement effectively guts the right to a speedy trial. In any functioning democracy, five years without a conviction is a failure of the state; in India, it is being used as a strategic tool to keep opposition silenced. The court has directed that they may apply for bail only after the examination of "protected witnesses"—a process that the police have notoriously dragged out. As the "mastermind" narrative continues to crumble under scrutiny, the state relies on time to do what the evidence cannot: break the spirit of those who refuse to be silent.
