Delhi Riots 2020 Timeline: Causes, 53 Deaths, Court Cases and Aftermath

The Delhi High Court again refuses bail to Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam Court ruling or order

A division bench of the Delhi High Court dismissed appeals by Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam against the trial court’s refusal of regular bail on 4 July 2026. The bench said it was “bound by judicial discipline” to follow the Supreme Court’s January 2026 order, which allowed the two to seek bail again only after the protected witnesses had been examined or a year had passed, whichever came first (judgment, The Indian Express, Business Standard).

It also rejected their claim to parity with co-accused Tasleem Ahmad and Abdul Khalid Saifi, who had been granted bail after a separate Supreme Court bench in May 2026 voiced “serious reservations” about parts of the January judgment; that difference in views has been referred to a larger bench (The Indian Express). The Delhi Police had called the two the “masterminds”, which they deny (LiveLaw, The Wire).

Read it with care: the draft brief dated this ruling 1 October; reports date it to Wednesday, 30 September 2026. It is a bail order. It does not decide guilt, and charges in the case had not been framed when AiTimeline checked.

A trial court convicts Tahir Hussain and four others in the Ankit Sharma murder case Court ruling or order

In the case over the killing of Intelligence Bureau staffer Ankit Sharma, whose body was recovered from a drain in the Chand Bagh and Dayalpur area in February 2020, Additional Sessions Judge Praveen Singh convicted former AAP councillor Tahir Hussain and four co-accused, Javed, Anas, Nazim and Kasim, on 13 July 2026. The offences included murder, kidnapping, rioting, unlawful assembly and promoting enmity between groups; Hussain was acquitted of criminal conspiracy and one other charge (The Quint).

On 31 July the court sentenced all five to life imprisonment, refusing the prosecution’s plea for the death penalty, and fined Hussain Rs 50,000 and each co-convict Rs 10,000 for kidnapping (ANI). The defence argued that no specific act in the killing was attributed to any of them and that they were convicted as members of an unlawful assembly; Hussain said he would appeal to the High Court.

Keep it separate: this is the trial court’s verdict in one murder case, open to appeal. It is not a verdict in the larger-conspiracy case, in which Hussain is also an accused. The brief dated the sentence to August; it was 31 July.

The trial court refuses fresh bail as arguments on charge near their end Investigation and charges

On 4 July 2026 Additional Sessions Judge Sameer Bajpai dismissed fresh bail applications by Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam, saying the Supreme Court had laid down specific conditions for when they could apply again (ANI). The High Court upheld that order on 30 September.

In the same case the Delhi Police finished their rebuttal arguments on the framing of charges against the accused, including Tahir Hussain, Khalid, Imam, Devangana Kalita and Natasha Narwal, in mid-July (India Gazette, ANI). AiTimeline found no report of an order framing charges by 23 October 2026.

The High Court lifts its restraint on a charge order Court ruling or order

Justice Neena Bansal Krishna dismissed Devangana Kalita’s plea for access to video recordings, which she said had been made by people engaged by the Delhi Police through a tender, and to police WhatsApp communications. The judge held that all the evidence the prosecution relied on was already on record and that copies had been supplied under section 207 of the CrPC (Bar and Bench).

The dismissal ended an interim order of 12 September 2024 under which the trial court could hear arguments on charge but pass no final order. The court partly allowed a separate application, letting Kalita inspect documents in the police malkhana that the prosecution does not rely on; her counsel said she would approach the Supreme Court (ANI).

The Supreme Court grants bail to five accused and refuses it to two Court ruling or order

Hearing appeals against the High Court’s September 2025 refusal, the Supreme Court granted bail to Gulfisha Fatima, Meeran Haider, Shifa-ur-Rehman, Mohammad Saleem Khan and Shadab Ahmad, and refused it to Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam. It held that a prima facie case under the UAPA was made out against the two, and that the accused “do not stand on equal footing” (judgment, 2026 INSC 2, Verdictum).

The Court said Khalid and Imam could apply again after the protected witnesses had been examined or after one year, whichever was earlier, and directed the trial court to take those witnesses without delay. A different bench later expressed reservations about parts of this reasoning in a separate UAPA case.

What it was: a bail ruling, based on the prima facie standard that UAPA bail requires. It is not a finding of guilt or innocence for any of the seven.

A magistrate orders a further probe into Kapil Mishra; a sessions court sets it aside Court ruling or order

On 1 April 2025 Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Vaibhav Chaurasia at Rouse Avenue Courts, acting on a complaint by Mohammad Ilyas, held that a cognisable offence was prima facie made out against BJP leader Kapil Mishra, then Delhi’s Law Minister, and directed further investigation. The Delhi Police had told the court that Mishra had no role in the riots (The Week).

Mishra challenged the order, and a sessions court stayed it in April. On 10 November 2025 the sessions court set it aside as “fundamentally flawed, illegal and improper”, holding that a magistrate could not direct further investigation in a matter already under trial (Business Standard, ANI).

Where it stands: Mishra has not been charged in connection with the riots. The setting aside was a ruling on the magistrate’s power, not a finding on the allegations either way.

The High Court refuses bail in the conspiracy case; the accused go to the Supreme Court Court ruling or order

The Delhi High Court rejected bail pleas by Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam and co-accused including Gulfisha Fatima, Meeran Haider, Mohd Saleem Khan, Shifa-ur-Rehman, Athar Khan, Shadab Ahmed and Abdul Khalid Saifi, saying the grant of bail to co-accused did not by itself entitle others to it, and rejecting the argument that more than five years in custody justified release (The Tribune).

The accused appealed, and on 22 September 2025 the Supreme Court issued notice to the Delhi Police (The Week). The appeals were decided on 5 January 2026. The High Court had first refused Khalid bail in October 2022 (The Indian Express).

Twelve men are acquitted in the Hashim Ali murder case Court ruling or order

A Karkardooma court acquitted 12 men accused of murder and criminal conspiracy over the killing of Hashim Ali in the Gokalpuri area on 26 February 2020. Eyewitnesses did not support the prosecution on identifying the accused, and the court held that the circumstantial evidence was too thin to tie any of them to the mob that killed him (LiveLaw, The Tribune).

The court also rejected the prosecution’s argument that WhatsApp chats in a group called “Kattar Hindu Ekta” amounted to confessions, and said a person could not be presumed to be part of a murder mob because he was seen in a mob elsewhere at another time.

Read it with care: an acquittal means the charge was not proved against these men. It does not mean that Hashim Ali was not killed, and AiTimeline did not find whether the prosecution appealed.

Five years on, most decided riot cases have ended in acquittal Counts and aftermath

The Indian Express examined the orders in every verdict delivered in the 695 cases of rioting, arson and unlawful assembly filed by the Northeast district police. Judgments had been delivered in 109; 90 were acquittals (82 percent) and 19 convictions. Another 16 cases ended in discharge, four FIRs were quashed and five were closed. The paper said the acquittals were split evenly between the two communities (The Indian Express).

Witnesses turned hostile in 51 of the 90 acquittals. In 19, courts noted that police had identified the accused after a long delay, and in 19 they found contradictions in police witnesses’ statements. A further 62 cases involving murder were handled by the Crime Branch, bringing the total to 757; of those, four had ended in acquittal, one in conviction and one in closure by then. A later update to the end of August 2025 counted 116 verdicts (Maktoob, citing The Indian Express).

The High Court bars a final charge order for now Court ruling or order

On Devangana Kalita’s plea for access to police video and communications, the Delhi High Court said the trial court “may continue with the arguments on charge, but no final order shall be made” (Bar and Bench). The order stayed in force until June 2026.

Arguments on charge had to restart more than once as judges changed: Additional Sessions Judge Amitabh Rawat heard the case from the first charge sheet until 2023, followed by Sameer Bajpai, who was briefly transferred and then returned to the case in July 2025.

The High Court hands the Faizan case to the CBI Investigation and charges

Faizan, 23, was one of several men seen in a video being beaten by policemen and apparently made to sing the national anthem during the riots. He died after being released from Jyoti Nagar police station. Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani transferred the investigation from the Delhi Police to the CBI, calling the police probe “tardy and sketchy” and saying the conduct in the video amounted to a hate crime by people who should have been custodians of the law (The Wire).

Newslaundry reported in February 2026 that the CBI had identified suspects (Newslaundry). AiTimeline did not verify whether anyone has been charged.

The first conviction in a riot case Court ruling or order

Dinesh Yadav was convicted of rioting, arson, house trespass and robbery as an active member of a mob that set fire to the house of a 73-year-old woman, Manori, in Gokalpuri. The court held that being part of the mob made him responsible even though he was not seen setting the fire. On 20 January 2022 he was sentenced to five years in prison and fined Rs 12,000; his lawyer said he would appeal (Al Jazeera).

The Supreme Court upholds the Delhi Assembly panel’s summons to Facebook Court ruling or order

The Delhi Assembly’s Peace and Harmony Committee, set up after the riots, summoned Facebook India’s head Ajit Mohan over the platform’s role. The Supreme Court refused to quash the summons, holding that the Assembly could inquire into matters such as peace and harmony, but that it could not enter the “prohibited domains” of law and order and criminal prosecution, which belong to the Union in Delhi, and that a witness could decline questions in those areas (judgment, Internet Freedom Foundation).

The High Court bails three student activists, warning about blurring protest and terror Court ruling or order

The Delhi High Court granted bail to Natasha Narwal, Devangana Kalita and Asif Iqbal Tanha in the conspiracy case, warning that in its anxiety to suppress dissent the State had blurred the line between the right to protest and terrorist activity (LiveLaw, Al Jazeera). They were released on 17 June.

On 18 June 2021 the Supreme Court declined to interfere with their release but directed that the judgment not be treated as a precedent. In May 2023 it dismissed the Delhi Police’s appeal, noting that the three had been on bail for two years (Verdictum).

Police file charge sheets in the larger-conspiracy case Investigation and charges

The Delhi Police Special Cell filed its first charge sheet in FIR 59/2020, the case alleging a larger conspiracy behind the riots, against 15 people under the UAPA and the Indian Penal Code. It ran to about 17,000 pages and built its case partly on WhatsApp groups (The Quint). Umar Khalid had been arrested on 13 September 2020.

On 22 November 2020 police filed a 930-page supplementary charge sheet against Khalid, Sharjeel Imam and Faizan Khan, and on 24 November the court found sufficient material to proceed under the UAPA (The Quint, LiveLaw). Imam had been arrested in January 2020 over his speeches in other cases. The draft brief’s “June 2023 supplementary charge sheet” could not be confirmed.

What a charge sheet is: the prosecution’s case. The accused dispute it, and it proves nothing until a court tests it at trial.

Investigations begin, and hundreds of cases are registered Investigation and charges

Two Special Investigation Teams of the Crime Branch took over the most serious cases, including the killings of Ratan Lal and Ankit Sharma, while the Northeast district police handled cases of rioting and arson (The Quint). In all about 757 cases were registered: 695 by the district police and 62 involving murder that went to the Crime Branch (The Indian Express).

Separately, the Special Cell registered FIR 59/2020, which alleged that the violence was planned. A person accused in one case was not automatically accused in others, and the case files followed different courts and timetables.

A High Court hearing on hate speech, and the judge’s transfer that night Court ruling or order

At a late-night hearing on 25-26 February and again on the 26th, a bench led by Justice S. Muralidhar ordered police protection for ambulances, and pressed the Delhi Police over why FIRs had not been registered for alleged inflammatory speeches by BJP leaders Kapil Mishra, Anurag Thakur and Parvesh Verma, asking the Police Commissioner to watch the videos and decide (The Quint).

That night the Law Ministry notified his transfer to the Punjab and Haryana High Court. The government said the Supreme Court collegium had recommended it on 12 February and the judge had agreed; critics, including the Delhi High Court Bar Association, condemned the timing (The Wire). Former Chief Justice K. G. Balakrishnan called the timing a coincidence but said the government should have been more careful (The Week). The case moved to another bench, which adjourned it.

The worst of the killing, then the violence subsides The violence

Mobs attacked people, homes, shops, places of worship and other property in neighbourhoods across northeast Delhi, including Chand Bagh, Shiv Vihar, Mustafabad, Bhajanpura and Gokalpuri. Ankit Sharma, an Intelligence Bureau staffer, was killed and his body recovered from a drain; Hashim Ali was among those killed in Gokalpuri on the 26th (Wikipedia, LiveLaw). The violence subsided from 26 February as more security forces were deployed.

The widely reported toll is 53 dead. Most of those killed were Muslims, according to news reports, and the dead included Hindus, among them Ankit Sharma and Head Constable Ratan Lal (Al Jazeera). The Indian Express gave the injured as more than 500; other counts are higher, depending on the date and what was counted (The Indian Express).

Keep it separate: who committed each act is for the court in each case. The death toll is not a verdict on any person or community.

Clashes spread; Head Constable Ratan Lal is killed The violence

Clashes, stone-pelting and arson spread from the Jaffrabad-Maujpur area to other parts of northeast Delhi. Head Constable Ratan Lal, 42, attached to the office of the ACP Gokalpuri, was killed during stone-pelting at Chand Bagh; the post-mortem found a bullet in his body. Shahdara DCP Amit Sharma and ACP Anuj Kumar were seriously injured (The Quint, The Indian Express).

US President Donald Trump arrived in India the same day for a two-day visit that included Delhi (Reuters). Restrictions were imposed in affected areas. The draft brief placed Ratan Lal’s death on 25 February; the reports date it to the 24th.

Kapil Mishra’s speech at Maujpur and the first clashes Law and politics

On the afternoon of 23 February BJP leader Kapil Mishra, who had lost the Delhi Assembly election two weeks earlier, addressed supporters near Maujpur with a senior police officer beside him. In a widely shared video he told the police to clear the roads blocked by protesters and said that once the US President had left, his supporters would not listen even to the police (Wikipedia). Stone-pelting between groups for and against the CAA was reported later that day (Reuters).

Critics say the remarks helped set off the violence. Mishra has denied wrongdoing and said he was asking the police to clear a blocked road; the Delhi Police told a court in 2025 that he had no role in the riots (The Week). He has not been charged.

A sit-in begins under the Jaffrabad Metro station Law and politics

On the night of 22 February a group of protesters, many of them women, began a sit-in against the CAA under the Jaffrabad Metro station, blocking a main road. Delhi had seen similar sit-ins for two months, the best known at Shaheen Bagh (Wikipedia).

The blockade became the focus of the confrontation in the following hours. Its existence is part of the context; it does not establish who was responsible for the violence that followed.

The Citizenship (Amendment) Act becomes law Law and politics

The Citizenship (Amendment) Bill passed the Lok Sabha on 9 December 2019 and the Rajya Sabha on 11 December, and received assent on 12 December (PRS). It offered a faster path to citizenship for Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains, Parsis and Christians from Afghanistan, Bangladesh and Pakistan who entered India on or before 31 December 2014. Muslims from those countries were not included in this route (Wikipedia).

The government said the law protected persecuted minorities. Critics argued that a religious test broke with secular equality, especially alongside a proposed National Register of Citizens. Protests followed across India, including at Jamia Millia Islamia and Shaheen Bagh from mid-December; for the campus side, see AiTimeline’s student protests timeline. Petitions challenging the law are before the Supreme Court, and the rules to implement it were notified on 11 March 2024.