Delhi HC denies anticipatory bail to YouTuber Ajeet Bharti in SC/ST Act case

The Delhi High Court HC on Thursday denied anticipatory bail to YouTuber Ajeet Bharti in a case concerning his alleged casteist and derogatory remarks against Member of Parliament MP Chandrashekhar Azad and members of the Scheduled Caste SC communityA singlejudge Bench of Justice Saurabh Banerjee dismissed Bhartirsquos plea seeking protection from arrest holding that an offence under the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes Prevention of Atrocities Act was prima facie made out against him news agency IANS reported The court held that the statutory bar on prearrest bail under the Act was attractedThe case was registered under provisions of the SCST Act the Information Technology Act and the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita BNS HC held that Sections 31r and 31s of the SCST Act were prima facie attracted and therefore Bhartirsquos petition was not maintainableBharti had approached the court challenging the rejection of his anticipatory bail plea by the Patiala House Courts in connection with the first information report FIR registered against him at North Avenue Police StationAccording to the prosecutionrsquos case Bharti allegedly made casteist derogatory and humiliating remarks concerning Azad and members of the SC community during an episode of his programme published on social mediaBharti had earlier sought anticipatory bail before the Patiala House Courts Additional Sessions Judge Saurabh Partap Singh Laler dismissed his plea on September 7 holding that the statutory bar under Section 18 of the SCST Act was attractedThe trial court had observed that the material prima facie disclosed an offence under Section 31r of the SCST Act which concerns intentional insult or intimidation of a member of a SC or Scheduled Tribe with intent to humiliateIt had further observed that the alleged remarks contained repeated references to caste names caste hierarchy and marriageability The court also noted that the alleged episode was published on a publicly accessible social media platform and had garnered more than 23000 views observing that the requirement of the remarks being made within public view could not be treated as plainly absent at the prearrest stageWhat happened during the Delhi HC hearingDuring the hearing on September 16 Justice Banerjee had remarked that Bharti ought to have been ldquocircumspectrdquo while making the alleged comments and questioned the Delhi Police on why no notice had been issued to himldquoYou dont require custodial interrogationrdquo the HC had askedThe Delhi Police submitted that the investigating officer had obtained Bhartirsquos address only two days earlier and was therefore unable to issue him a notice before thatThe court had also objected to the manner in which a transcript containing the alleged remarks was placed on recordJustice Banerjee had remarked that the words allegedly used by Bharti were offensive and warned his counsel of possible contempt proceedings over the transcriptAppearing for Bharti advocate Jai Anant Dehadrai had argued that the ingredients of the SCST Act were not attracted as the alleged remarks were not made with the intention of insulting or humiliating Azad on account of his caste identityDehadrai had contended that the remarks were made in the context of alleged comments concerning Bhartirsquos sister on social media and that his client had not targeted Azad because of his casteThe counsel had further submitted that an abusive statement by itself would not constitute an offence under the SCST Act unless the statutory requirement of intention to insult or humiliate on the ground of caste was satisfiedDelhi Police and the complainant had opposed the plea submitting that the alleged remarks were directed against a particular caste and were made publicly on social media The complainantrsquos counsel had also argued that around 23000 people had access to the social media content and that caste references were repeatedly made thereby satisfying the requirement of the remarks being made in a place within public viewThe Delhi HC has now dismissed Bhartirsquos anticipatory bail plea The detailed order is awaitedWith IANS inputs