The Delhi High Court is set to issue a ruling on July 1, 2024, regarding the maintainability of a petition filed by Bibhav Kumar, a close associate of Arvind Kejriwal, requesting that his arrest by the Delhi Police be declared illegal.
After extensive arguments, the bench of Justice Swarna Kanta Sharma reserved the order on the issue of maintainability on May 31, 2024.
Appearing for Bibhav Kumar, Senior Advocate N Hariharan submitted that, “I (Bibhav Kumar) put an anticipatory bail, while around 4:00-4:30, it is being heard, I am arrested around 4:15. If the arrest is happening in such a fashion, then the court must intervene. My fundamental right to be arrested in such a fashion was exploited, so I am here. You flouted the 41A procedure”.
Senior Advocate Sanjay Jain, representing Delhi Police, stated that their petition is not maintainable. The accused argued that arrest guidelines were violated, moving a separate application before the trial court. The Magistrate concluded that reasons for the urgent arrest were mentioned, leading to an order on May 20th, which should be taken seriously.
He said, “This order can be revised within 90 days by filing a revision application, but they skipped this step and approached us directly.”
Bibhav’s plea also sought compensation for his alleged illegal arrest, claiming it violated the law. It called for departmental action against the unknown officials involved in the arrest decision.
Trial Court further said, “The investigation is still at the nascent stage and the apprehension of influencing the witnesses or tampering with the evidence cannot be ruled out. Keeping in view the allegations made against the applicant, at this stage, no ground for bail is made out.”
” The allegations raised by the victim have to be taken at their face value and cannot be swiped away. The mere delay in registering the FIR would not have much impact on the case as the injuries are apparent in the MLC after four days. There seems to be no pre-meditation on the part of the victim as if it would have been so, then the FIR would have been registered on the same day,” said the court.
The applicant was found at the CM’s house despite termination, the court noted. The investigating agency reported the applicant formatted his mobile and withheld the password. CCTV footage from the CM’s camp office was also found blank, according to the order.
The judge noted that the complainant was medically examined at AIIMS Hospital on 16.05.2024, and her statement under section 164 Cr.P.C. was recorded by the Metropolitan Magistrate. Her complaint was corroborated by the medical report and her statement under section 164 of the Cr. PC.
The trial court denied Bibhav’s bail petition, citing the early stage of the investigation and concerns about potential witness tampering and evidence tampering. They also stated that Bibhav Kumar was included in the investigation but did not cooperate, leading to his arrest to prevent tampering with crucial evidence.
