Delhi Court: Swatantra Bhardwaj Granted Regular Bail In Assault Case

• A Delhi court has granted regular bail to right-wing influencer Swatantra Bhardwaj in a case involving an alleged assault.
• The case stems from an incident during CJP protests at Jantar Mantar, where Bhardwaj allegedly assaulted the father of a student-activist.
• Bhardwaj was initially charged under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, with later additions under the SC/ST Act and a separate POCSO Act FIR.
• Additional Sessions Judge Saurabh Pratap Singh Laler had previously granted interim bail, stipulating that Bhardwaj's conduct would be observed.
• Bhardwaj was arrested on September 5 after claiming on social media that he had "cracked the skull" of the victim's father.

This precedent is especially relevant for legal practitioners, as it highlights the court's consideration of an accused's conduct during an interim bail period as a factor in granting regular bail.

A Delhi court recently granted regular bail to Swatantra Bhardwaj, a prominent right-wing influencer, in a case stemming from an alleged assault during protests organized by the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) at Jantar Mantar. The order was issued by Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) Saurabh Pratap Singh Laler of the Patiala House Court. This decision follows an earlier grant of interim bail for a period of three weeks, during which the court explicitly stated its intention to monitor Bhardwaj's conduct before making a final determination on his plea for regular bail.

Bhardwaj's arrest occurred on September 5 in Uttar Pradesh, following allegations that he assaulted the father of a Dalit student-activist in July during the aforementioned CJP demonstrations. Initially, the charges against him were filed under Sections 115(2) for causing simple hurt and 126(2) for wrongful restraint, both provisions of the newly enacted Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS). However, the legal landscape of the case intensified after Bhardwaj himself posted on social media, claiming he had "cracked the skull" of the girl's father and had only been detained for a few hours. This public statement, coupled with protests by CJP leaders, the girl, and her father at the Parliament Street police station, led to the addition of more severe charges, including provisions of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (SC/ST Act), culminating in his subsequent arrest.

The legal proceedings against Swatantra Bhardwaj involve a complex array of statutes, reflecting the gravity of the alleged actions and their social implications. Initially, the charges were framed under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), specifically Sections 115(2) and 126(2), which address causing simple hurt and wrongful restraint, respectively. The BNS, a recent legislative overhaul of India's criminal code, introduces new numbering and some substantive changes to existing offenses. However, the scope of the case broadened significantly with the invocation of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, commonly known as the SC/ST Act. This particular legislation is designed to prevent atrocities against members of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and provides for special courts for the trial of such offenses and for the relief and rehabilitation of victims.

Furthermore, a separate First Information Report (FIR) has been lodged against Bhardwaj under provisions of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO Act). While the details of this specific FIR were not elaborated in the context of the bail order, its existence underscores the multi-faceted and serious nature of the allegations he faces. The progression from initial BNS charges to the inclusion of the SC/ST Act and a separate POCSO Act FIR highlights the evolving legal strategy and the impact of public outcry and the accused's own statements on the legal process.

The decision by Additional Sessions Judge Saurabh Pratap Singh Laler to grant Swatantra Bhardwaj regular bail carries particular significance due to the court's explicit prior condition regarding his interim bail. The court had previously granted a three-week interim bail period, stating that it would closely observe Bhardwaj's conduct during this time before considering his application for regular bail. This approach underscores a judicial emphasis on an accused's behavior while out on temporary release as a critical factor in assessing their suitability for continued freedom pending trial.

This precedent is especially relevant for legal practitioners, as it highlights the court's consideration of an accused's conduct during an interim bail period as a factor in granting regular bail. Such judicial scrutiny is particularly pertinent in high-profile cases, especially those involving multiple serious charges under significant legislation like the SC/ST Act and the new Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. The court's deliberate observation period serves as a reminder that bail is not merely a right but a privilege contingent on adherence to judicial expectations, influencing the trajectory of the legal process for individuals facing serious allegations.

Lawyers should observe the court's consideration of an accused's conduct during an interim bail period as a factor in granting regular bail, particularly in high-profile cases involving multiple serious charges under the SC/ST Act and the new Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.

Source: Reporting on a recent Delhi court decision.