Law & Justice

Delhi Court Grants Bail to Swatantra Bharadwaj in Jantar Mantar Assault Case

By Arnabjit Sur

A Delhi court granted bail to Swatantra Bharadwaj, a self‑described right‑wing influencer, on Tuesday. The decision was made by Additional Sessions Judge Saurabh Pratap Singh Laler of Patiala House Courts, after Bharadwaj’s three‑week interim bail expired. The case originates from an incident on June 23 at Jantar Mantar during a CJP protest over alleged examination irregularities and paper leaks. According to the FIR, the complainant was recording the protest with his daughter when Bharadwaj and two or three other identified persons questioned him about the video. An argument escalated into a physical altercation, during which the complainant was punched and struck on the head with a hard object resembling an iron bangle or kada, causing head injuries that required stitches. Delhi Police later stated the injury was caused by a metal kada worn by one of the persons involved and that a medical examination at RML Hospital described the injuries as simple in nature.

The FIR initially invoked bailable offences under Sections 115(2) (voluntarily causing hurt) and 126(2) (wrongful restraint) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS). Bharadwaj’s arrest followed a supplementary statement recorded by the complainant on September 4, after which provisions of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and Section 351(3) (criminal intimidation) of the BNS were added. The SC/ST Act invocation and Bharadwaj’s arrest followed a viral podcast in September in which he allegedly boasted of attacking the complainant and claimed he had “cracked the skull” of the protester’s father, and referenced his connections with political leaders.

During the interim bail granted on September 15, the court noted that the allegation of caste‑based slurs was made nearly 10 weeks after the incident and was not part of the original complaint. The court also highlighted gaps in the investigation, including the absence of forensic examinations of videos and electronic materials, incomplete collection of CCTV footage, police recordings, call detail records, location data, and social media information. Police were directed to investigate threatening and sexually explicit messages allegedly sent to the complainant and his minor daughter and determine whether those responsible were linked to Bharadwaj.

The court also noted that Bharadwaj had not fully disclosed his criminal antecedents, including another FIR filed on behalf of the complainant’s minor daughter under the POCSO Act. It directed Bharadwaj not to contact the complainant, his daughter, family members, or witnesses, and barred him from making public statements, podcasts, videos, or social media posts about the case. The investigating officer was instructed to file a status report on the next hearing, including Bharadwaj’s conduct during the interim bail period.