Delhi High Court to Rule on Bibhav Kumar's Plea Against Arrest in Swati Maliwal 'Assault' Case

Delhi High Court to Rule on Bibhav Kumar's Plea Against 

Arrest in Swati Maliwal 'Assault' Case

               

The Delhi High Court is set to deliver a crucial verdict on July 1, 2024, regarding the maintainability of a plea filed by Bibhav Kumar, a close aide of Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal. Kumar is seeking a declaration that his arrest by Delhi Police in connection with the Swati Maliwal assault case was illegal.

Background of the Case

Bibhav Kumar was arrested by the Delhi Police on May 18, 2024, following an FIR registered by Rajya Sabha MP Swati Maliwal, who alleged assault. Kumar’s plea contends that his arrest was in violation of legal procedures, particularly the guidelines outlined in Section 41A of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC).

Court Proceedings

Justice Swarna Kanta Sharma reserved the order on the maintainability of Kumar's plea after hearing arguments on May 31, 2024. Senior Advocate N Hariharan, representing Kumar, argued that the arrest was conducted improperly, emphasizing the timing of the arrest during an ongoing anticipatory bail hearing. He claimed this violated Kumar's fundamental rights.

Arguments from Delhi Police

On the other side, Senior Advocate Sanjay Jain, representing Delhi Police, argued that the plea is not maintainable. He highlighted that the trial court had found reasons for the emergent arrest and that Kumar should have pursued a revision application within the prescribed 90-day period instead of directly approaching the High Court.

Compensation and Departmental Action

Kumar's plea also seeks appropriate compensation for the alleged illegal arrest and calls for departmental action against the officials involved in the decision-making process leading to his arrest.

Previous Court Decisions

Earlier, the trial court denied Kumar’s bail petition, citing concerns that he might influence witnesses or tamper with evidence. The court noted the nascent stage of the investigation and emphasized the severity of the allegations. The trial court's order also mentioned that Kumar had not cooperated with the investigation and had formatted his mobile phone, complicating the collection of evidence.

Arguments from the Complainant’s Counsel

The complainant’s counsel argued that Swati Maliwal, an Aam Aadmi Party MP, had legitimate reasons to be at the Chief Minister's office, whereas Kumar’s presence there was unauthorized. They highlighted that the complaint was made immediately by Maliwal and that her injuries were significant enough to be documented days after the alleged assault.

Conclusion

The upcoming decision by the Delhi High Court will have significant implications for the case and could set a precedent regarding the procedural aspects of arrests and anticipatory bail hearings. The ruling will be closely watched by legal experts and political observers alike.