Delhi High Court dismisses bail plea of Kejriwal's Personal Secretary arrested for allegedly assaulting MP Swati Maliwal at CM's residence
Justice Anoop Kumar Mendiratta [12-07-2024]

Read Order: BIBHAV KUMAR v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI [DEL HC- BAIL APPLN. 2096/2024]

LE Correspondent

New Delhi, July 15, 2024: The Delhi High Court has denied bail to Bibhav Kumar, the Personal Secretary to Delhi chief minister Arvind Kejriwal, who was arrested for allegedly assaulting Rajya Sabha MP Swati Maliwal at the CM’s residence on May 13, 2024.

The High Court dismissed Kumar's bail application citing the serious nature of the accusations and the possibility of him influencing witnesses. The High Court stated that the allegations of assault made by a sitting MP against the CM's Personal Secretary cannot be disbelieved merely due to the delay in registering the FIR. The court also noted that the complainant's call to the police helpline during the alleged assault lends credibility to her account. The court expressed concern over the alleged suppression of crucial evidence and emphasized that given Kumar's influential position, there is a possibility of witnesses being influenced if he is released on bail at this stage. The matter is under investigation, and the chargesheet is expected to be filed within the coming week.

According to the FIR filed by Maliwal, she visited the CM's residence on the morning of May 13 to meet with the Chief Minister. Upon entering, she was asked to wait in the drawing room. Suddenly, Bibhav Kumar allegedly barged in and started verbally abusing and physically assaulting her without provocation. The complainant alleged that Kumar slapped her 7-8 times, dragged her, pulled her shirt up, and attacked her repeatedly. Despite her screams for help, no one came to her aid. The complainant managed to free herself and called the police helpline. However, she left the police station without filing a complaint due to pain and media attention.

The FIR was finally registered three days later on May 16.

The prosecution argued that Kumar, being a powerful functionary in the CM's office, could tamper with evidence and influence witnesses. It was also pointed out that selective CCTV footage was provided, and Kumar's seized mobile phone was formatted before being handed over to the police, potentially destroying valuable evidence.