‘…power has gone into his head?’: SC questions Kejriwal aide Bibhav Kumar’s conduct in Swati Maliwal ‘assault’ case

“What he thinks…the power has gone into his head?… We are shocked… She is in a particular physical condition at that time. She is crying that I am in such and such physical condition… We don’t want to read in the open court… she tells him that please stop because of this physical condition and this man continues,” said Justice Kant, asking if Kumar did not “feel ashamed of doing it to a young woman?”

Senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi said these were the allegations in the First Information Report (FIR) which was registered three days later and that they were a matter of trial.

“This is a matter of trial… FIR is a version of a person who makes it three days later with a friendly police under a friendly Lieutenant Governor. My complaint on the same day is not registered,” said Singhvi.

But the court was not impressed. “These are all your internal political affairs. We are only examining the law and the criminal allegations,” added Justice Kant.

Justice Datta asked Singhvi if Kumar was secretary to the chief minister or ex-secretary to the chief minister on May 13, 2024, the date of the alleged incident.

Singhvi said that he was the political secretary, mostly handling appointments and rendering some political advice. Justice Kant said, “You are not a political secretary, you are a government official, probably…”.

Singhvi submitted that Kumar has a case going on in the Central Administrative Tribunal and is currently out of service. He, however, reiterated that Kumar was political secretary to Kejriwal.

Justice Datta pointed out from documents that he was an ex-private secretary to the chief minister and asked, “If you are an ex-private secretary, then what authority you have per se in the chief minister’s residence?”

As Singhvi sought to defend Kumar, Justice Kant said, “You are saying as if some goon has gone inside the house, and you want to protect…”.

Singhvi cited the Medico Legal Case (MLC) report and said it states there were “only two injuries, one to the right cheek and one to the thigh” and that they were “simple and non-dangerous” which is “totally contrary to her allegation”.

The “FIR is lodged on May 16, and the story, which is put up with FIR, according to me is very strange … .that I (Maliwal) was so traumatised that I took three days….”. He added, “She went the first day to the police station. She did not lodge an FIR in the police station, came back and after three days” lodged the FIR.

Justice Surya Kant pointed out that “she also called 112”. He added, “The point is if she called up immediately after the incident, the emergency call, it showed what?…That belies your story that she subsequently concocted the allegations.”

Singhvi said that Maliwal “came to this house”. “Nobody went to her house. She waited in the waiting room,” he added.

Justice Kant asked if he was trying to say that the chief minister’s official residence was a private residence. “…is it a private residence?… The chief minister’s official bungalow is a private residence?”

Singhvi said he had been denied bail on the ground that he could tamper with evidence and wondered how he could do that but Justice Kant countered, “If this kind of person can’t influence witnesses, who else will do?”

Singhvi said the chargesheet had been filed and said the court even grants bail in murder cases.

“In murder cases, robbery cases, dacoity cases, every day we grant bail. But the manner in which the occurrence takes place, that really sometimes…We grant even to contract killers, but look at the way…,” said Justice Kant.