Umar Khalid — an accused in the 2020 Delhi riots conspiracy case — has moved the Supreme Court seeking a review of its January 5 order denying him bail.Senior counsel Kapil Sibal on Monday mentioned Khalid’s review petition before a Bench led by Justice Aravind Kumar requesting it to take up the matter in an open court.“I wanted to make a mention… My Lords are hearing the review petition in Umar Khalid’s case. It’s listed on Wednesday, I believe. My request is, it’s only for your consideration if you could have it in an open court,” Sibal submitted.“We will look into the papers, and if required, we will call it (for an open court hearing),” the Bench told Sibal.Review petitions are generally heard “in chamber”—and not in an open court—by a procedure called “hearing by circulation” where advocates representing the parties are not allowed to argue. But in exceptional cases, the top court allows open court hearing, if convinced about its need.Booked under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA), 1967, and certain provisions of the Indian Penal Code in connection with the larger conspiracy behind the February 2020 Delhi riots, the two accused have been in jail for more than five years.The February 2020 Delhi riots during the visit of then US President Donald Trump claimed 53 lives and left more than 700 injured. The violence had erupted during the protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) and the National Register of Citizens (NRC).Khalid was arrested on September 13, 2020, on charges of delivering provocative speeches on February 24 and 25 when Donald Trump, in his first term as the US President, visited India.Imam was arrested on January 28, 2020, for speeches made during anti-CAA protests. He was later arrested in a larger conspiracy case in August 2020.Highlighting the “central and formative role” attributed to accused Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam in the 2020 Delhi riots conspiracy case, the Supreme Court had on January 5 dismissed their bail pleas even as it granted bail to five other accused.“This court is satisfied that the prosecution material, taken at face value as required at this stage, discloses a prima facie attribution of a central and formative role by appellants…. Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam in the alleged conspiracy,” it had said.“The material suggests involvement at the level of planning, mobilisation and strategic direction, extending beyond episodic or localised acts. The statutory threshold under Section 43D (5) of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, therefore, stands attracted qua these appellants” the top court had saidThe Bench, however, granted bail to five other accused—Gulfisha Fatima, Meera Haider, Shifa Ur Rehman, Md Saleem Khan and Shadab Ahmed—noting that their cases stood on a different footing in terms of their alleged role in the case.Two other accused—Devangana Kalita and Natasha Narwal—were granted bail in September 2020 by the Delhi High Court while bail pleas of accused Tasleem Ahmed and Abdul Khalid Saifi were pending before the top court.“The record discloses that all the appellants (Khalid and Imam) do not stand on an equal footing as regards culpability. The allegations against the principal accused indicate a central and directive role in conceptualising, planning and coordinating the alleged terrorist act, whereas the material against certain co-accused reflects conduct of a subsidiary or facilitative nature,” it had said.