SC Issues Notice On AAP MLA Somnath Bharti’s Plea To Transfer Case Pending In UP To Delhi

The Supreme Court has recently issued notice on a petition filed by former Delhi Law Minister Somnath Bharti seeking transfer of a case pending before the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sultanpur, Uttar Pradesh, to the Special Court, Additional Session Judge, Rouse Avenue Court, New Delhi.

A bench comprising of Justice SK Kaul and Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah stayed the proceedings pending before the Sultanpur court in the FIR registered in relation to Bharti’s comment in December 2020 about a government health care unit in Uttar Pradesh while campaigning in Prayagraj.

Based on a purported video of six puppies lying in filth in a chamber allocated for doctors to treat patients, Bharti allegedly remarked, “though children were giving birth in these hospitals, they were not of humans and were of dogs.” Following that, he was detained in connection with a FIR stemming from the aforementioned Healthcare Centre statement, on charges of criminal intimidation and inciting enmity amongst communities.

Bharti was brought before the Special Court and taken into judicial custody. Another FIR was filed in connection with the first, saying that the petitioner used abusive language towards police officers and UP CM Yogi Adityanath.

Mr. Siddharth Dave, Senior Advocate, appearing on behalf of Somnath Bharti, stated that he is requesting that the case pending before the Trial Court in Uttar Pradesh be transferred. He informed the Bench that the two cases lodged against Bharti were motivated by political revenge.

“We want a transfer. We’re worried. The threats are currently coming from MLAs in the government (Uttar Pradesh) presently,” he added.

According to the transfer petition, if Bharti attends the proceedings in Uttar Pradesh, there’s a possibility of fatal attack. Apart from the threat to his life, it is expected that Bharti would not receive a fair trial and justice in the state of Uttar Pradesh due to political retribution.

“What is the status of the case?” Justice Kaul inquired.

“Chargesheet has been filed, and cognizance has been taken. We had previously requested that the two cases be consolidated. In one case, a chargesheet has been filed,” Mr. Dave replied.

“Immediately upon my conviction if I am at all convicted, there is an immediate disqualification. Though it is not a reason for transfer, it is an obstacle as far as my going is concerned,” he added.