Delhi’s Tis Hazari Court on Monday dismissed the bail plea of Delhi Chief Minister’s aide Bibhav Kumar in connection with the alleged assault of Aam Aadmi Party MP Swati Maliwal.
The court said that the investigation is at an initial stage and that the chances of influencing witnesses and tampering with evidence cannot be ruled out.
Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) Sushil Anuj Tyagi said, “The investigation is still at the nascent stage and the apprehension of influencing the witnesses or tampering with the evidence cannot be ruled out. Keeping in view the allegations made against the applicant, at this stage, no ground for bail is made out.”
“The allegations raised by the victim have to be taken on their face value and cannot be swiped away. The mere delay in registering the FIR would not have much impact on the case as the injuries are apparent in the MLC after four days. There seems to be no pre-meditation on the part of the victim as if it would have been so, then the FIR would have been registered on the same day,” ASJ Tyagi said in the order passed on May 27.
The court while dismissing the bail plea noted that the victim is a sitting Member of Parliament from the Aam Aadmi Party and as per her allegations, she has been brutally beaten up at the CM’s house by the applicant.
The applicant was present at the CM’s house even after his employment was terminated, the court further observed.
The investigating agency has also reported that the applicant has formatted his mobile phone and has not provided the password for opening his mobile phone. The CCTV footage collected from the CM’s camp office is also stated to be blank, the court noted in the order.
The judge said that it has come on record that the complainant was medically examined on May 16, 2024, at AIIMS Hospital. Her statement under section 164 CrPC was recorded by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate. Her version as mentioned in the complaint finds corroboration from the MLC and her statement recorded under section 164 CrPC.
The court stated that the applicant (Bibhav Kumar) was joined in the investigation, but as per the investigation officer, he did not cooperate in the investigation and was arrested to prevent him from tampering with crucial evidence.
During the arguments, the counsel for the complainant argued that the victim is the sitting MP of the Aam Aadmi Party and earlier also, she has gone to meet the CM and she cannot be termed as a trespasser, rather it was the applicant/accused who was present in the CM office without any authority.
It was further contended that no one reported the matter to the police from the CM
office and it was the complainant who made the complaint to the police from the spot itself.
It was also argued that the magnitude of the injuries was such that they were present even after four days when the medical examination was done. He contended that the complainant has an association with the CM since past nine years and she was brutally assaulted. She went to the police station but due to trauma, she did not lodge a complaint.
It was further contended that the applicant made a complaint on May 17, 2024, at 3.34 pm through e-mail when the complainant had already reported the matter to the police.
It was also contended that the complainant is receiving threats of death and rape through
vulgar messages on social media. It was contended that the applicant is not simply a PA of CM but he is a very influential person with whom the complainant is apprehending danger. It is therefore prayed that bail cannot be granted to the applicant. (ANI)
The court said that the investigation is at an initial stage and that the chances of influencing witnesses and tampering with evidence cannot be ruled out.
Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) Sushil Anuj Tyagi said, “The investigation is still at the nascent stage and the apprehension of influencing the witnesses or tampering with the evidence cannot be ruled out. Keeping in view the allegations made against the applicant, at this stage, no ground for bail is made out.”
“The allegations raised by the victim have to be taken on their face value and cannot be swiped away. The mere delay in registering the FIR would not have much impact on the case as the injuries are apparent in the MLC after four days. There seems to be no pre-meditation on the part of the victim as if it would have been so, then the FIR would have been registered on the same day,” ASJ Tyagi said in the order passed on May 27.
The court while dismissing the bail plea noted that the victim is a sitting Member of Parliament from the Aam Aadmi Party and as per her allegations, she has been brutally beaten up at the CM’s house by the applicant.
The applicant was present at the CM’s house even after his employment was terminated, the court further observed.
The investigating agency has also reported that the applicant has formatted his mobile phone and has not provided the password for opening his mobile phone. The CCTV footage collected from the CM’s camp office is also stated to be blank, the court noted in the order.
The judge said that it has come on record that the complainant was medically examined on May 16, 2024, at AIIMS Hospital. Her statement under section 164 CrPC was recorded by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate. Her version as mentioned in the complaint finds corroboration from the MLC and her statement recorded under section 164 CrPC.
The court stated that the applicant (Bibhav Kumar) was joined in the investigation, but as per the investigation officer, he did not cooperate in the investigation and was arrested to prevent him from tampering with crucial evidence.
During the arguments, the counsel for the complainant argued that the victim is the sitting MP of the Aam Aadmi Party and earlier also, she has gone to meet the CM and she cannot be termed as a trespasser, rather it was the applicant/accused who was present in the CM office without any authority.
It was further contended that no one reported the matter to the police from the CM
office and it was the complainant who made the complaint to the police from the spot itself.
It was also argued that the magnitude of the injuries was such that they were present even after four days when the medical examination was done. He contended that the complainant has an association with the CM since past nine years and she was brutally assaulted. She went to the police station but due to trauma, she did not lodge a complaint.
It was further contended that the applicant made a complaint on May 17, 2024, at 3.34 pm through e-mail when the complainant had already reported the matter to the police.
It was also contended that the complainant is receiving threats of death and rape through
vulgar messages on social media. It was contended that the applicant is not simply a PA of CM but he is a very influential person with whom the complainant is apprehending danger. It is therefore prayed that bail cannot be granted to the applicant. (ANI)