New Delhi: The Delhi Police Wednesday opposed the anticipatory bail plea of YouTuber Ajeet Bharti in a case lodged against him over alleged casteist remarks against Nagina MP Chandrashekhar Azad.
While the counsel for the police contended that the words allegedly used by the accused directly insult a particular caste, Azad’s lawyer opposed the anticipatory bail plea saying the purported remarks were derogatory and intentional.
However, Bharti’s counsel sought the relief saying that the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (SCST Act) was not attracted as there was no intentional insult or humiliation and the YouTuber’s remarks had to be viewed in the context they were made.
Justice Saurabh Banerjee, after hearing all sides, said he would pass an order on Bharti’s plea.
The prosecutor contended that these words were allegedly called by Bharti on a social media platform, so it is not that it was done in closed walls. All these ingredients are there to attract the SCST Act and this anticipatory bail plea does not lie, she argued.
The court asked the police as to how many notices were sent to Bharti to join the investigation.
No notices sent to him Why You don’t require custodial interrogation or what, the judge said.
To this, the prosecutor said the investigating officer got the address of the accused two days back from a social media platform, and that is why he could not send any notices to him.
Bharti’s counsel submitted that the alleged caste reference by itself would not constitute an offence unless accompanied by an intention to insult or humiliate the person on the ground of caste.
He said Bharti’s remarks concerning Azad were made in the context of an exchange on social media and the YouTuber had not intended to target the Lok Sabha MP because of his caste.
He said Bharti did not use any casteist slur and had responded to a grave provocation against his family member.
Bharti approached the high court after a trial court here refused to grant him pre-arrest bail in the case September 7.
Azad, the Bhim Army chief, has alleged in a complaint to the Delhi Police that Bharti made caste-based, abusive, derogatory and humiliating statements against him, the members of the SC community and B R Ambedkar on social media.
The FIR was registered under provisions of the SCST Act, the Information Technology Act and the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS).
The trial court, while denying anticipatory bail, said the ingredients of the offence under the SCST Act were prima facie disclosed in the material before it, which bars granting pre-arrest bail to an accused.
