New Delhi: The Tis Hazari court on Monday reserved an order after hearing lengthy arguments on the bail plea of Bibhav Kumar, accused in the Swati Maliwal assault case.
Swati Maliwal, who was presented in the hearing, opposed the bail plea saying she was receiving threats. She broke down in tears during the hearing.
Additional Sessions Judge Sushil Anuj Tyagi reserved the order after hearing submissions by senior advocate N Hariharan for the accused, additional public prosecutor Atul Srivastava and advocate Madhav Khurana, counsel for Swati Maliwal.
Senior advocate N Hariharan submitted that this bail application is maintainable. This is the right court that has jurisdiction to hear the bail application. In this FIR section 308 IPC has been invoked which is triable by the sessions court.
Advocate Hariharan argued that the complainant went to CM’s residence and called PA Bibhav Kumar. PA Bibhav Kumar was not present at the CM’s house, after which she headed towards the CM’s residence without any permission or prior appointment.
“Can anyone enter in this manner, this is the official residence of CM,” Senior Advocate Hariharan argued. There was a trespass and a report was also filed.”
“She had no appointment for a meeting, and there was no message of her arrival,” he argued.
He further submitted that she was stopped by the security staff after which she asked them “You will make an MP wait,” the senior Advocate referred to the report.
She sat in the waiting room and asked security to talk to Bibhav Kumar, the senior defence counsel.
Senior counsel argued, “What she is stating in the FIR, that is not true.”
“This FIR is not the result of contemporaneous complaint. FIR was lodged after three days,” the senior Advocate argued.
“How you will not accept what we are saying. There was no occasion to say such things,” he argued.
“Kindly look at the place where the alleged incident took place where many people were present. How can such an incident take place at this place,” N Hariharan submitted.
“There are many hospitals in the area, but she was taken to AIIMS for medical. There is no grievous injury on the vital part, so where is the question of Culpable homicide not amounting to murder,” the Advocate argued.
“Defence counsel N Hariharan further argued that the injuries can be self-inflicted.
The allegations do not make out a case of intention to disrobe her,” the senior Advocate argued.
At this point, Swati Maliwal broke down in tears when the defence counsel was arguing.
“This entire FIR is the result of afterthought. I am seeking bail only, not the acquittal,” the senior advocate argued.
He submitted that CCTV footage has already been recovered, so there is no question of tampering.
“My (Bibhav) availability to police investigation is from the very beginning, he argued, adding that everything was pre-planned and tailor-made to suit her story,” Advocate Hariharan argued.
It was an overreach by the prosecution preventing this court from passing an order on anticipatory bail, sr. Advocate submitted.
They informed about the arrest when the court was dictating the order, he added.
He has been in custody since May 18, senior Advocate concluded his arguments.
Additional Public Prosecutor(APP) Atul Srivastava opposed the bail application and submitted that intention is not required to make out a case of Culpable homicide not amounting to murder, knowledge is sufficient.
“The accused had beaten a lady, alone dragged her and her head hit the centre table, will this not cause death,” APP argued.
“If I slap a lady in an open place, it is outraging the modesty of a woman,” the APP argued.
APP opposed the submissions of defence counsel that she went there with a premeditated mind to malign Bibhav Kumar.
Her reputation was kept in high esteem by the party chief and was called Lady Singham, the APP submitted.
Swati Maliwal reached Tis Hazari court to attend the bail hearing.
At the outset, Delhi Police opposed the bail application by saying that it was not filed in an appropriate court.