Delhi High Court Upholds Plea Challenging Arrest of CM Arvind Kejriwal’s Aide
New Delhi: On Monday, the Delhi High Court deemed maintainable the plea filed by Bibhav Kumar, a close aide of Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, challenging his arrest in connection with the alleged assault on AAP MP Swati Maliwal at the CM’s residence. The court has requested the city’s police to provide their response within one week.
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma, who reserved the order on May 31 regarding the maintainability of Kumar’s petition, issued a notice and asked the Delhi Police to file its reply within a week.
Kumar, currently in judicial custody, is accused of assaulting Maliwal at Kejriwal’s official residence on May 13 and was arrested on May 18.
Additionally, another bench led by Justice Anoop Kumar Mendiratta granted Maliwal’s counsel time to respond to Kumar’s bail plea, scheduling the hearing for July 8.
The FIR against Kumar, registered on May 16, includes charges under various Indian Penal Code (IPC) provisions, such as criminal intimidation, assault or criminal force on a woman with the intent to disrobe, and an attempt to commit culpable homicide.
The senior counsel for the police opposed the notice issuance on the grounds that the petition challenging the arrest was not maintainable, arguing that the trial court had already addressed the objections raised by the petitioner, and he should challenge that order instead.
The high court held that a writ petition could be considered maintainable even if an alternative remedy is available when filed for the enforcement of fundamental rights under the Constitution of India.
“The petitioner has specifically alleged a breach of his fundamental rights by the State/police, challenging his arrest on grounds of non-compliance with Section 41A of the Cr.P.C. and directions of the Hon’ble Apex Court,” the court noted.
“At this stage, the petition before this court is maintainable to the extent of issuing a notice to the respondent. The merit of the case will, however, be decided only after a reply is filed by the State,” the court concluded, scheduling the case for further hearing on July 8.
In his plea, Kumar has sought a declaration that his arrest was illegal and in gross violation of Section 41A (notice of appearance before police officer) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and the law. He claimed his arrest had an “oblique motive” while his anticipatory bail plea was pending in the trial court, violating his fundamental rights.
Kumar has also requested “appropriate compensation” for his “illegal” arrest and the initiation of departmental action against the officials involved in his arrest decision.
On June 7, the Tis Hazari court refused bail to Kumar, citing “grave and serious” charges and the apprehension that he might influence witnesses. His initial bail plea was dismissed on May 27 by another sessions court, which found no “pre-meditation” by Maliwal in lodging the FIR and deemed her allegations credible.
