Swatantra Bhardwaj Gets 3-Week Interim Bail in Jantar Mantar Assault Case

Delhi’s Patiala House Court has granted three weeks of interim bail to Swatantra Bhardwaj in connection with the alleged assault case linked to a CJP protest at Jantar Mantar. The court also imposed conditions on his conduct, including restrictions concerning the complainant, witnesses and social media. The matter will be heard further on October 6.

**New Delhi:** Delhi’s Patiala House Court has granted **three weeks of interim bail to Swatantra Bhardwaj** in connection with an alleged assault case arising from a protest at Jantar Mantar. The court has imposed several conditions while granting the temporary relief, and the matter is scheduled to come up again on **October 6** for further consideration of the regular bail plea.

The case relates to an incident reported during a protest organised by the **Cockroach Janta Party (CJP)** at Jantar Mantar on June 23, 2026. According to the allegations before the court, a dispute and alleged physical altercation took place during the protest involving Swatantra Bhardwaj and the father of a minor girl associated with the organisation.

### ***FIR Initially Registered Under BNS Sections***

The initial FIR registered at Delhi’s Parliament Street Police Station included **Section 115(2) and Section 126(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS)**.

Section 115(2) relates to voluntarily causing hurt, while Section 126(2) deals with wrongful restraint.

The case subsequently saw the addition of further provisions following a supplementary statement by the complainant. The additional provisions included **Section 351(3) and Section 3(5) of the BNS**, along with provisions of the **Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989**, commonly known as the SC/ST Act.

The complainant subsequently alleged that caste-related derogatory remarks had also been made during the incident. The defence, however, questioned the timing of these allegations and pointed out that the SC/ST-related allegations were not part of the initial complaint.

The court noted this aspect during the bail proceedings but did not treat the delayed allegation as conclusive proof that the allegation was false. The court observed that the truthfulness of the allegations would have to be determined during the appropriate stage of the legal proceedings.

### ***Separate POCSO Case Also Mentioned***

Another significant aspect that came up during the proceedings was the existence of a **separate FIR under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act**.

The court was informed that the POCSO case was separate from the FIR in which Bhardwaj was arrested. The distinction between the two proceedings was also relevant during the bail hearing.

### ***Defence Arguments Before the Court***

During the hearing, Bhardwaj’s counsel challenged the prosecution’s case and questioned the subsequent addition of the SC/ST Act provisions.

The defence argued that the original FIR did not contain allegations attracting the SC/ST Act and that the relevant allegations appeared later through the supplementary statement.

The defence also referred to video footage relating to the incident and claimed that the complainant had allegedly attacked Bhardwaj first.

The prosecution and the complainant’s side opposed the bail plea and highlighted the allegations involved in the case, as well as concerns relating to the complainant, the minor girl and potential witnesses.

### ***Court Raises Questions Over Investigation***

### While considering the interim bail plea, the court also took note of certain aspects of the investigation.

The court pointed to **gaps and deficiencies in the investigation** and sought clarification from the investigating officer regarding those issues.

The court also considered the fact that Bhardwaj’s custodial interrogation had been completed. The offences being investigated also carry a maximum punishment of up to seven years, a factor considered during the bail proceedings.

### ***Restrictions on Social Media Activity***

The court imposed several conditions while granting interim bail.

Bhardwaj has been directed not to contact or influence the complainant, the minor girl, family members or prosecution witnesses. He has also been directed not to tamper with evidence and to cooperate with the investigation whenever required.

The court has additionally imposed restrictions concerning social media activity. During the period of interim bail, Bhardwaj has been restrained from publishing or sharing material relating to the case, his defence, or the complainant and the complainant’s family through social media, interviews, podcasts, videos or similar platforms.

The restrictions are intended to prevent any possibility of influencing or intimidating the complainant or witnesses while the proceedings are pending.

### ***Regular Bail Hearing on October 6***

The relief granted to Bhardwaj is **interim bail and not an acquittal**. The criminal proceedings and investigation in the matter will continue.

The court is scheduled to consider the matter further on **October 6**, when the regular bail plea will be taken up.

For now, Bhardwaj has received temporary relief for three weeks, subject to the conditions imposed by the Patiala House Court, while the investigation and judicial proceedings in the case continue.