Delhi’s Tis Hazari Court has granted three days of custodial interrogation to Delhi Police for Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal’s aide, Bibhav Kumar, who has been accused of assaulting AAP Rajya Sabha MP Swati Maliwal.
The court asserted that Delhi Police cannot be “deprived of its right” to recover the mobile phone Kumar was carrying during the alleged assault at the Chief Minister’s official residence on May 13.
“The presence of the accused in a room where NVRs (network video recorders) are installed is not denied by him or his lawyer. To the mind of this court, the reason for remaining there for a sufficient time is obviously a question which needs to be investigated for which custodial interrogation is necessary,” stated Metropolitan Magistrate Gaurav Goyal. NVR is a specialized computer that records security video surveillance footage in digital format to a hard drive.
Maliwal’s Allegations
Noting Maliwal’s specific allegation that Kumar had recorded the incident on his cell phone, the court said, “Investigating agency cannot be deprived of their rights to make the best endeavour to recover the mobile that the accused carried.” It allowed the city police’s application for Kumar’s custody, noting its “bonafide requirements.”
“Application moved by the Investigating Officer (IO) is partly allowed and the accused is remanded to police custody for three days,” the court said and asked the city police to produce Kumar before it on May 31. Police had sought his custody for five days. The court also permitted Bibhav Kumar’s applications for medicines and daily meetings with his advocates, wife, and daughter.
During the hearing, additional public prosecutor (APP) Atul Srivastava said IPC Section 201 (causing disappearance of evidence of offence) was added to the case as, according to the CCTV footage, Kumar was seen standing for around 20 minutes in the rooms where NVRs were installed.
The initial CCTV footage provided to police for the relevant time, however, was blank, the APP said, adding, “There is a strong possibility that the accused tampered with the evidence.” Srivastava noted that between the time the FIR was lodged and Kumar was arrested, he visited some places outside Delhi, and in one of the videos, he was seen carrying two mobile phones.
“As per the complainant’s statement, the accused has video-graphed the incident which needs to be probed and his custodial interrogation is required to recover the mobile,” the APP stated.
Kumar’s counsel opposed the Delhi Police’s plea for his custodial interrogation, claiming they had no evidence to incriminate him and no justification for seeking his custody. He claimed police wanted to “humiliate” Kumar and “create false evidence at the instance of Maliwal,” who is an “influential person.”
The advocate asserted that due to the delay in lodging the FIR, the Delhi Police now wanted to “fill the lacunae” by taking Kumar into custody.
Previous Court Decisions
On May 27, Kumar’s bail plea was dismissed by a sessions court, which noted that there appeared to be no “pre-meditation” by Maliwal in lodging the FIR and that her allegations could not be “swiped away.”
Bibhav Kumar was arrested on May 18. He was remanded to police custody for five days the same day by a magisterial court, which observed that his anticipatory bail plea had become infructuous because of his arrest. He was subsequently sent to four-day judicial custody last Friday.
Charges and FIR
On May 16, an FIR was filed against Kumar under various Indian Penal Code (IPC) provisions, including those related to criminal intimidation, assault or criminal force on a woman with intent to disrobe, and attempt to commit culpable homicide
