New Delhi: The Delhi Police has added the IPC section for “disappearing evidence and giving false information” against Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal’s aide Bibhav Kumar in AAP MP Swati Maliwal’s assault case, an official said on Monday.
Kumar is accused of assaulting Maliwal at the chief minister’s official residence on May 13.
The official said Section 201 (causing disappearance of evidence of offence, or giving false information to screen offender) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) was added in the case.
Section 201 carries a provision for imprisonment of one-sixth of the punishment awarded for the biggest offence in the crime, he added.
The FIR against Kumar was registered on 16 May under provisions of the IPC such as those related to criminal intimidation, assault or criminal force on a woman with the intent to disrobe, and attempt to commit culpable homicide.
Maliwal, a former chief of the Delhi Commission for Women, alleged that Kumar attacked her with full force, slapped and kicked her when she had gone to meet Kejriwal.
According to a senior police officer, Kumar’s mobile phone was found to have been formatted when he was arrested from Kejriwal’s residence on 18 May.
He was in Mumbai before returning to Delhi.
The police took Kumar to Mumbai twice. He is suspected to have formatted his mobile phone in Mumbai but did not disclose the place where he formatted it or the person with whom he shared the data, the officer said.
During his police custody, Kumar did not cooperate in the investigation, he added.
Another police officer said three CCTV DVRs (digital video recorders) were collected from Kejriwal’s residence — two from cameras installed at the entrance and one outside the drawing room.
The DVRs were sent to the forensic science laboratory as it was suspected that these were tampered with. The reports were awaited, he said.
Kumar was arrested on 18 May and is currently lodged in Tihar jail.
This report is auto-generated from PTI news service. ThePrint holds no responsibility for its content.
Also read: ‘No impact of delayed FIR, injuries apparent’ — why a Delhi court rejected Bibhav Kumar’s bail plea