Maliwal came to Kejriwal's house without appointment: Bibhav tells court

Delhi CM's close aide moves Tis Hazari court, seeking bail in the assault case against him

Bibhav Kumar (shown) is accused by Swati Maliwal of assault (photo courtesy @RationalPrabal/X)
Bibhav Kumar (shown) is accused by Swati Maliwal of assault (photo courtesy @RationalPrabal/X)

NH Digital

Delhi chief minister Arvind Kejriwal’s close aide Bibhav Kumar, who is accused of assaulting his fellow AAP minister Swati Maliwal, has claimed in a Delhi court that Maliwal had no appointment to meet the CM and that she did not inform anyone of her arrival.

His counsel also questioned why she didn’t file a complaint immediately if anything untoward had transpired on that day.

During the hearing, Maliwal reportedly broke down in court.

Kumar has moved Delhi’s Tis Hazari court to seek bail in the assault case against him. His lawyer N. Hariharan informed the court that Maliwal did not inform anyone of her arrival at the chief minister’s house and came there with a “premeditated intent of creating trouble”.

“She went to the CM residence... Bibhav Kumar was not present at that CM House, then she headed towards the CM residence… Maliwal did not say that the CM called her to visit his premises… What she did amounts to trespass. Can someone enter anyone’s residence like this? This is the CM House,” said the lawyer.

The lawyer also added that Kumar had asked Maliwal to wait outside. However, she insisted on going inside.

“Does being an MP give you a licence to do anything? Reading one of the statements from the security: 'Sansad ko aap bahaar intezaar karwaoge? (Will you make a minister of the state wait outside?)' She had some pre-meditated thoughts before coming (to the chief minister's residence),” argued Kumar’s lawyer.

The defence lawyer said she chose to go into the chief minister's drawing room because there is no CCTV there. “She knew there was no CCTV! She chose the location so she could conveniently make allegations later,” he said.

Hariharan questioned the three-day delay in Maliwal filing a complaint as well. “She was the DCW chief… She was well aware of her rights. If her rights were violated, then she should have made the complaint immediately,” he said.

Kumar’s lawyers questioned Maliwal’s MLC report as well, and said, “The date of the MLC is on 16 May. This incident allegedly took place on 16 May. This is an unexplainable gap. We do not know the nature of the wounds…Are they recent? Are they three days old?”

The defence claimed in court that Kumar came to know of the FIR against him from the media. “Even after getting to know about this, I sent a letter saying I was willing to join the investigation and cooperate. I also informed them that even I made a complaint about the incident,” he said.

Appearing for the state, additional public prosecutor (APP) Atul Srivastava queried whether Maliwal, a sitting MP, would malign the image of a person who is not even a permanent employee.

“The CM camp office had no register where people who are taking appointments' details are mentioned. If Swati (Maliwal) was trespassing, why no call was made to 100?" said Srivastava.

The advocates argued that the FIR by Kumar was an afterthought and reiterated their request for bail rather than acquittal.

“She is being escorted by the security themselves inside (as per CCTV), then does it mean she 'barged in'? Where is the question of trespass? This was implied permission. She went inside the waiting room with the security. How is she trespassing?” he asked.

The APP opposed the claims of the defence lawyer that she went there with a pre-meditated intent to malign Bibhav Kumar. She was called ‘Lady Singham’ in the party, the APP highlighted, and noted that the accused, Kumar, had been terminated from his post following the incident.

Kumar, the personal assistant to Kejriwal, is alleged to have assaulted Maliwal at the chief minister’s official residence on 13 May. He was arrested on 18 May by the Delhi Police. He has been in police custody since then. 

Finally, metropolitan magistrate Gaurav Goyal allowed the prosecution’s plea seeking Kumar’s remand to judicial custody for four days.

Follow us on: Facebook, Twitter, Google News, Instagram 

Join our official telegram channel (@nationalherald) and stay updated with the latest headlines