YouTuber and commentator Ajeet Bharti has approached Delhi's Patiala House Court seeking anticipatory bail in the case registered against him under the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (SC/ST Act). .The case was heard today by Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) Saurabh Pratap Singh Laler. Advocate Jai Anant Dehadrai and Pratyush Prasanna appeared for Bharti and argued that no offence under the SC/ST Act was made out against him on the facts of this case. Dehadrai added that the police was yet to issue a notice under Section 35(3) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) to Bharti.Section 35(3) mandates that police officers must issue a written notice of appearance to an accused person in cases where an immediate arrest is not required..After hearing the case briefly, the Court said that if the police issues a notice to Bharti, the same must be placed before the Court for examination. "In the event such notice is issued by the Investigating Officer, a copy thereof shall be placed by IO on record of this Court, so that the Court may examine the date of issuance of the notice and the prima facie satisfaction regarding the ingredients of the offence under the SC/ST (POA) Act, to dispose of this application," the Court said. It has summoned the Investigating Officer (IO) and issued notice to the police on the anticipatory bail plea. The Court has listed the case for arguments on August 31. .An FIR was registered against Bharti at Delhi's North Avenue Police Station on August 23 under the SC/ST Act, along with Section 67 of the IT Act and Sections 196(1)(c) and 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. The complaint was filed by Balakram Bauddh, Delhi State President of the Azad Samaj Party (Kanshi Ram), over a video titled "SB79: Reservation Hatao Andolan Nautanki & More | Saptahik Bakaiti" published on Bharti's social media handle. As per the complaint, Bharti used caste-based and abusive language, made objectionable remarks involving Chandrashekhar Azad ('Ravan') and BR Ambedkar, used sexually degrading language about women and issued threats. However, Bharti has defended himself publicly, saying his remarks were provoked by a degrading comment about his mother/sister on his video.
