Bharat Express

Swati Maliwal Case: Court Rejects Bibhav Kumar’s Bail Plea

The court dismissed the anticipatory bail as infructuous after additional public prosecutor Atul Kumar Srivastava informed that Bibhav was arrested at 4:15 PM while the bail hearing was ongoing.

Swati Maliwal

Swati Maliwal

Bibhav Kumar’s counsel, senior advocate N Hariharan, argued in court that Swati Maliwal had no appointment to meet Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal on May 13. Hariharan was moving an anticipatory bail application for Bibhav, who was accused of assaulting Maliwal and subsequently taken into custody by the Delhi Police on Saturday. He presented videos already in circulation to dispute Maliwal’s assault allegations.

Hariharan contended that the incident was fabricated and that his client was arrested without prior notice. He highlighted that the area is monitored by CCTV and that an appointment is necessary to meet the Chief Minister, which Maliwal did not have. “There was a security breach, and a report was filed by the security personnel,” he argued.

Hariharan noted that Maliwal, currently a member of the Rajya Sabha and a chairperson of the Delhi Commission for Women (DCW), had no apparent reason to hold a grudge against Bibhav. “The motive seems to be elsewhere,” he suggested. He also assured the court that his client was not a flight risk and requested interim protection, emphasizing that Bibhav was held at the police station for hours without notice.

Also read: Aurangzeb’s soul crept into Congress, UP CM hit out at congress

According to Hariharan, Maliwal visited the Station House Officer (SHO) on May 13 without filing a complaint, only to lodge one three days later on May 16. “This delay indicates she was contemplating and conspiring,” he asserted, seeking protection for his client.

The court dismissed the anticipatory bail as infructuous after additional public prosecutor Atul Kumar Srivastava informed that Bibhav was arrested at 4:15 PM while the bail hearing was ongoing.

Addressing the media, Hariharan stated, “I have argued that there is no case and it warrants interim bail. The CCTV footage does not corroborate the delayed statement. The order has been reserved for today.”