Assault Against Kanhaiya Kumar: Delhi Court Grants Bail to Accused Individual

Delhi’s Karkardooma Court has granted bail to a person accused of assaulting Congress leader Kanhaiya Kumar and outraging the modesty of a woman politician in the New Usman Pur area of North East Delhi. The incident allegedly occurred last Friday during Kumar’s interaction with people at the AAP office in New Usmanpur, hosted by the woman politician.

A viral video purportedly depicts individuals garlanding Kumar, throwing ink at him, attempting to assault him, and misbehaving with the woman politician who intervened.

Ajay Kumar alias Ranveer Bhati, the accused, was granted bail by Metropolitan Magistrate Arushi Parwal upon furnishing a bail bond of Rs 25,000 and a surety bond of a similar amount.

Reasoning Behind Bail Decision

The court, in its order, acknowledged that the offenses mentioned in the FIR carry punishments of less than seven years, and considering the accused’s clean antecedents and the circumstances of the case, bail was granted. Ajay Kumar was arrested on Monday and produced before the court.

The Delhi Police sought 14 days of judicial custody for the accused, which was opposed by the defense counsel citing Supreme Court guidelines in Arnesh Kumar Vs the State of Bihar, arguing that arrest was unnecessary as the alleged offenses carried a maximum punishment of less than seven years.

Advocate Praveen Goswami, representing the accused, argued against the false implication of Ajay Kumar in the offense under Section 354 IPC (outraging modesty of woman), emphasizing the absence of the complainant at the scene and the availability of video footage supporting the accused’s version. The defense highlighted Ajay Kumar’s lack of previous criminal involvement and the absence of intent to outrage the modesty of the complainant.

Court’s Consideration and Decision

The court viewed a video clip of the incident recorded on a mobile phone and considered arguments from both sides. The Additional Public Prosecutor for the state pressed for judicial custody citing ongoing investigation and the need to prevent similar offenses, but the Investigating Officer stated that Ajay Kumar had no prior criminal record.

Counsel for the complainant argued for specific allegations of assault and a preplanned conspiracy by an unlawful assembly, supported by video evidence showing the complainant accompanying Kanhaiya Kumar. However, the court noted that the FIR primarily addressed offenses carrying punishments of up to seven years, without invoking charges related to unlawful assembly.

In granting bail, the court balanced the presumption of innocence in favor of the accused and their right to personal liberty against the state’s interest in maintaining public order and protecting the integrity of the investigation.

Read More: Supreme Court, Delhi High Court, States High Court, Other Courts, International