Swati Maliwal Assault Case
The Supreme Court has issued a notice on a plea by Bibhav Kumar, a close aide to Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, challenging the Delhi High Court’s decision to deny him bail in the Swati Maliwal assault case. A bench comprising Justices Surya Kant, Dipankar Datta, and Ujjal Bhuyan passed the order after hearing Senior Advocate Dr. Abhishek Manu Singhvi, who represented Kumar. The case is scheduled to be heard next Wednesday when the bench convenes again.
During the hearing, Singhvi argued that Kumar has been in custody for 75 days. A chargesheet has been filed since the Delhi High Court’s order. He contended that Maliwal lodged the FIR three days after the incident. This is with the assistance of what he described as a “friendly police” under a “friendly LG,” whereas Kumar’s FIR from the same day was ignored.
Observation
Singhvi also pointed to the Medical Legal Certificate (MLC). Maliwal’s injuries were minor and non-threatening. He highlighted that Maliwal visited the police station on the day of the incident but did not file an FIR.
However, the bench raised concerns, with Justice Kant questioning the narrative by pointing to Maliwal’s emergency call. Hence, suggesting that it contradicted the claim of a fabricated case. Justice Datta asked whether Kumar was acting as the CM’s Secretary or Ex-Secretary on the incident date. Singhvi replied that Kumar was the political secretary managing appointments. Justice Kant expressed disagreement with this characterization.
High Court’s Decision:
The Delhi High Court had previously denied bail, citing Kumar’s significant influence and potential to tamper with evidence or influence witnesses. The court emphasised the gravity of the accusations and the apprehensions surrounding witness tampering.
The High Court noted that Maliwal, an Aam Aadmi Party MP, was initially hesitant to file a complaint due to Kumar’s powerful position. The court concluded that her traumatised state and the severe nature of the unprovoked assault warranted the denial of bail.
Background and Legal Proceedings:
The FIR against Kumar was filed based on Maliwal’s complaint. It was alleged that Kumar assaulted her during a visit to Kejriwal’s residence on May 13. Kumar was arrested on May 18, and the Delhi Police accused him of non-cooperation. Also, withholding his mobile phone password, which they deemed crucial for the investigation.
Kumar’s initial bail plea was rejected by the trial court on May 27. This was followed by a second rejection by the Sessions Court on June 7. The Delhi High Court subsequently denied his bail on similar grounds, prompting Kumar to approach the Supreme Court.
Kumar has argued that the legal actions against him are an abuse of criminal machinery. He had claimed that both he and Maliwal filed complaints, yet only her case is being pursued due to her influence as an MP. He alleges that Maliwal’s FIR is part of a malicious scheme against him.
In a related development, Kumar has also filed a petition with the Delhi High Court challenging his arrest. The court has issued notice to the Delhi Police.
This Supreme Court notice represents a crucial step in the ongoing legal battle. The next hearing set to further address the complexities of the case.
