New Delhi: Allegations have to be taken at face value; mere delay in registration of FIR does not hold any impact as medical report substantiates injury even after four days of alleged assault; and there seems to be no pre-meditation in filing of the complaint — these were the broader grounds on which Delhi court Monday rejected the bail plea of Bibhav Kumar, a former aide to jailed Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, in the Aam Aadmi Party MP Swati Maliwal assault case.
The judge also emphasised that influencing witnesses and tampering with evidence cannot be ruled out considering the “nascent” stage of the investigation.
Following the ruling, AAP Monday said that Kumar would challenge the order in Delhi High Court.
Kumar was arrested on 18 May after Maliwal lodged a police complaint with the Delhi Police alleging assault, criminal intimidation, and insulting her modesty.
On 16 May, Kumar was booked under Indian Penal Code sections 308 (attempt to commit culpable homicide), 341 (wrongful restraint), 354(b) (assault or use of criminal force against a woman with the intent to disrobe her), 506 (criminal intimidation) and 509 (word, gesture or act intended to insult the modesty of a woman).
After an initial five-day police custody starting on 19 May, he was remanded to a four-day judicial custody.
“The allegations raised by the victim have to be taken at 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 (Medico-Legal Case) 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,” the additional sessions Judge Sushil Anuj Tyagi wrote in the order.
“Keeping in view the allegations made against the applicant, at this stage, no ground for bail is made out,” the order added.
Also Read: Kejriwal hopes ‘justice’ will be served in Maliwal case, she hits back — ‘you victim-shamed me’
Courtroom exchange
Maliwal, the former chairperson of the Delhi Commission for Women (DCW), was present in court while Kumar’s bail plea was being heard.
An emotional Maliwal argued that Kumar was a very powerful and close associate of Kejriwal. She voiced concerns over the safety of herself and her family, should Kumar be granted bail, citing his involvement in an AAP protest following his arrest.
“If Bibhav Kumar is allowed to come out, my life and my family’s life would be in grave danger,” she told the court.
Meanwhile, senior advocate N. Hariharan, who represented Kumar in the court, argued that the FIR filed in the case was based on a “deliberated version” of the allegations made by Maliwal and that there was no intention of Kumar to commit culpable homicide or to hurt her modesty — for which he has been booked.
Furthermore, the defense counsel contended that it was Maliwal who allegedly trespassed at the CM’s residence. The security officers’ report did not substantiate any assault, and the defense referred to purported CCTV footage from the waiting hall, suggesting her exit appeared routine.
There was no stripping of clothes, as claimed in the complaint, which formed the basis for FIR, the advocate added.
Moreover, Kumar’s counsel pointed out the delay in the filing of the FIR on 16 May, while the alleged assault took place on 13 May. The defense also argued that the medical examination was conducted at AIIMS and not at any hospital near the victim’s residence.
In response, Special Public Prosecutor (SPP) Atul Srivastava justified the decision to perform the MLC at AIIMS, citing Maliwal’s residence in CR Park, South East Delhi, as the reason.
He also addressed the claim regarding Maliwal’s lack of a scheduled meeting with the Delhi CM, stating that the prosecution has not found any logs or digital proof to confirm appointments at the CM’s camp office.
Furthermore, Srivastava raised doubts about Kumar’s role at the CM’s residence, given his dismissal as the CM’s personal assistant — a detail he did not disclose to Maliwal.
Lastly, Srivastava maintained that Maliwal delayed filing a police complaint and FIR to avoid turning the issue into a political controversy.
(Edited by Richa Mishra)
Also Read: Fixing Kejriwal’s meetings & his rivals — Bibhav Kumar of Swati Maliwal row is ultimate AAP insider