New Delhi:The Supreme Court on Thursday shredded the defence of Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal's aide Bibhav Kumar, who sought bail in the AAP Rajya Sabha member Swati Maliwal assault case.
The apex court slammed Bibhav Kumar and told his counsel didn’t he feel ashamed of what he was doing to a young woman, who was in a particular physical condition, she was crying, and she requested him to stop. "Has the power gone into his head," the court slammed Kumar.
A three-judge bench comprising Justices Surya Kant, Dipankar Datta and Ujjal Bhuyan, strongly criticized Kumar’s conduct and told his counsel, senior advocate A M Singhvi, that courts everyday grant bail to people accused in murder, robbery cases, and also contract killers, but in this case, it is not a question of minor injury or major injury, but the question is of manner in which the incident occurred.
Singhvi insisted that it is a matter of trial, and he is before the court seeking bail for his client. He said even the trial court should have granted bail in the case as there are alleged contradictions in Maliwal's statement about where she says she was hit, and pointed out that the incident occurred on May 13, and the FIR was lodged after a gap of three days on May 16.
He said that Maliwal went to the police station on the date of the incident but did not lodge an FIR and came back, and after three days went back and registered the FIR with these injuries "which are simple and non-dangerous". Seeking bail, Singhvi said his client has been in custody over 70 days.
Justice Kant told Singhvi that Maliwal calling 112 immediately after the incident, shows what? Singhvi replied that it shows she has a grievance. to this, Justice Kant said: "That belies your story that she concocted the incident".
Singhvi said she came to the house and waited in the waiting room. Justice Kant asked Singhvi: "Is the chief minister’s official bungalow a private residence? Is that required to keep these kinds of goons, is the way to deal with it? We are shocked, and this is not a question of minor injury or major injury. The question is of manner....," Justice Kant said.
The counsel replied that the chargesheet has been filed, and the question is that is his client entitled for bail or not? "What can I tamper with?” he said. Justice Kant made it clear that in murder and robbery cases, every day court grants bail to the accused but “the way the occurrence took place…”. “We do not want to read in open court what she tells him. 'Please stop' because of her physical condition and this man continues. What he thinks, power has gone into head…these words are verbatim from the FIR”, said Justice Kant.
Singhvi said the Delhi police and the lieutenant governor (LG) did not register his client’s complaint the same day. At this juncture, Justice Datta queried Singhvi, on the day of the incident May 13, the petitioner was chief minister’s secretary or ex-secretary? Who are you? Singhvi said he is a political secretary of the CM and handles the appointments. “You are not the political secretary, you are a government official probably, this is what?”, the bench queried.
Singhvi said he was a government servant and he has a case going on in Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) and “I am out of service. I am a political secretary who mainly handles appointments and some political advice”.
Bibhav's counsel said an officer asked Swati Maliwal to wait in the waiting room, as there was no direction regarding Maliwal and by that time she crossed the security point and reached the door of the inside office. “Dr Singhvi, this version you have obtained after the occurrence…the story that he called him from the gate, this gentleman Mr Dixit. Coming from the front gate of the house and then coming and creating… ”, said Justice Kant.