Umar Khalid's lawyers sought two adjournments and withdrew his Supreme Court bail plea. The reel inflates this to seven or more and claims it proves strong evidence and lawyer reluctance.
- Wrong: Court records show his lawyers sought only two adjournments, not seven.
- Wrong: The actual count is two adjournments by defence.
- No record found: The sources reviewed do not settle whether Umar Khalid's lawyers are reluctant to argue the case.
- True: Senior advocate Kapil Sibal withdrew the Supreme Court bail plea in 2024 citing changed circumstances.
Checked against: BOOM, The Hindu
Why we say that›
Umar Khalid lawyers sought two adjournments, not seven as this reel claims.
The ex-CJI's quote is real but the number of defence adjournments is wrong. BOOM's review of court records shows only two by Khalid's side out of 13 hearings. The causal leap that this proves strong evidence and reluctance is not established.
The bail withdrawal and two defence adjournments are real. None of the records show seven adjournments by his lawyers or establish that any delay proves strong evidence or reluctance.
The reel uses a 2025 ex-CJI Chandrachud quote but does not mention that court records reviewed by fact-checkers show only two defence adjournments out of 13 total hearings.
Reported 10 Aug 2026
Claims
2 false · 1 true · 1 no record
- False
Umar Khalid's lawyers sought at least seven adjournments in his case
- False
Lawyers for Umar Khalid repeatedly sought adjournments because they know there are very strong evidences against their client
What we found
The actual count is two adjournments by defence. No evidence shows this was due to strong evidence against him.
- No record found
Umar Khalid's lawyers are reluctant to argue the case
- True
Umar Khalid's bail application was withdrawn
What we found
Senior advocate Kapil Sibal withdrew the Supreme Court bail plea in 2024 citing changed circumstances.
The full story, from the sources›
BOOM found that Umar Khalid's lawyer sought adjournments twice, not seven times, contradicting ex-CJI DY Chandrachud's claim... matter came up 13 times... Khalids lawyer asked for an adjournment twice. - BOOM (2025-09-05) senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Mr. Khalid, sought and got permission to withdraw the bail plea. Mr. Sibal referred to “changed circumstances and said he would seek relief in the trial court. - The Hindu (2024-02-14)
From fact-checks · reporting
What else it leaves out (2)›
- Umar Khalid remains in custody with trial delays continuing into 2026. The Supreme Court previously rejected bail citing UAPA gravity.
- Adjournments in complex UAPA cases are common from both sides for many procedural reasons.
How it's framed (4)›
Sources (2)›
BOOM found that Umar Khalid's lawyer sought adjournments twice, not seven times, contradicting ex-CJI DY Chandrachud's claim... matter came up 13 times... Khalids lawyer asked for an adjournment twice.
senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Mr. Khalid, sought and got permission to withdraw the bail plea. Mr. Sibal referred to “changed circumstances and said he would seek relief in the trial court.
About this account›
- Swaniya Lamba's content often critiques left-liberal voices and highlights court records in UAPA cases.
Checked against 2 sources · 10 Aug 2026
Help us improve
Was this analysis useful?
One tap helps us find what Blindspot should improve next.