Delhi High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail to YouTuber Ajeet Bharti

NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court on Thursday denied anticipatory bail to YouTuber Ajeet Bharti, who is facing allegations of caste-based derogatory remarks against Nagina MP Chandrashekhar Azad. The court found the plea to be non-maintainable.

Justice Saurabh Banerjee rejected Bharti’s request for pre-arrest bail, stating that there was sufficient evidence to establish a case under the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act against him. The court also acknowledged the statutory prohibition on granting anticipatory bail under this Act.

“In light of the prima facie establishment of a case under the SC/ST Act and considering the statutory bar on bail under this Act, the request for anticipatory bail is dismissed as non-maintainable,” the judge declared.

The detailed order from the court is still pending.

HC Reviews Arguments from Bharti, Police, and Azad

The high court had reserved its ruling on September 16 after hearing arguments from Bharti’s legal team, the Delhi Police, and Azad himself. Bharti approached the high court after a trial court had declined his anticipatory bail plea on September 7, indicating that the available evidence suggested an offense under the SC/ST Act and that the prohibitive clause on anticipatory bail applied.

Bharti’s attorney contended that the SC/ST Act was not applicable since there was no intentional insult or humiliation involved, asserting that the remarks should be interpreted within their contextual framework. Furthermore, the lawyer noted that Bharti did not use any overtly casteist language and had responded on social media after facing significant provocation related to his family.

Conversely, the Delhi Police opposed the bail plea, arguing that Bharti’s allegedly offensive words targeted a particular caste directly. The prosecutor asserted that the remarks made in a public domain were sufficient to invoke the provisions of the SC/ST Act.

Azad’s legal representative also countered Bharti’s plea, labeling the alleged statements as derogatory and deliberate.

FIR Filed Under SC/ST Act, IT Act, and BNS

Azad, who leads the Bhim Army, lodged a complaint with the Delhi Police stating that Bharti had made caste-based, abusive, derogatory, and humiliating comments against him, members of the Scheduled Caste community, and B.R. Ambedkar on social media. The FIR was registered under the SC/ST Act, the Information Technology Act, and the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS).

The case revolves around statements allegedly made by Bharti during a social media program. Following the filing of the complaint at Delhi’s North Avenue police station, Bharti challenged the decision of the trial court from September 7, arguing that the accusations did not substantiate an offense under the SC/ST Act and that custodial interrogation was unnecessary as the relevant material was already publicly accessible.

However, the trial court clarified that its findings were strictly related to the anticipatory bail plea and did not determine the case’s merits.

Public Opinion

Should anticipatory bail be granted in cases under the SC/ST Act? Join the discussion!