The Supreme Court on Thursday issued a notice to the Delhi Police in connection with a plea by Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal’s aide Bibhav Kumar, who is accused of assaulting AAP Rajya Sabha member Swati Maliwal. Kumar is challenging Delhi High Court’s order refusing him bail.

Seeking a response from the Delhi Police and posting the matter for further hearing on August 7, a bench comprising Justice Surya Kant, Justice Dipankar Datta, and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan asked senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, “Is the Chief Minister’s residence a private bungalow? Is this kind of goon supposed to work in the Chief Minister’s residence? We are shocked; this is not about minor or major injuries.”

Senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing for Bibhav Kumar, pointed out contradictions in Maliwal’s statement regarding the location where she was allegedly assaulted. He noted that Maliwal had visited the police station on the day of the incident but left without lodging an FIR.

In a poser, the bench asked about the fact that Malliwal had called the police helpline (112).

As Singhvi urged the bench to grant bail, the bench said, “You are right; we grant bail to murderers and killers. But here, look at the FIR. She is crying due to her physical condition. Did you have the authority? If this kind of person cannot influence witnesses, then who can? Was anyone present in the drawing room to speak against him, do you think? He doesn’t seem ashamed; we think.”

As Singhvi argued that the FIR lodged by Maliwal should not be treated as gospel truth, the bench observed, “We don’t want to read the FIR in open court… But once she tells him to stop because of her physical condition, this man continues. What does he think, that power has gone to his head?”

Singhvi told the bench that Kumar has been in custody for 75 days and that the chargesheet has been filed. At this, the bench asked that the chargesheet be placed on record for its perusal.

On July 12, the Delhi High Court had dismissed Kumar’s bail plea, saying he enjoys “considerable influence” and no ground has been made out to grant him relief. The High Court had said that it cannot be ruled out that witnesses may be influenced or evidence tampered with in case Kumar is released on bail.

On May 16, an FIR was registered against Kumar under various provisions of the Indian Penal Code, including those related to criminal intimidation, assault, or using criminal force on a woman with the intent to disrobe and attempt to commit culpable homicide.

Kumar had moved the High Court after a Tis Hazari court here dismissed his bail plea on May 26. Approaching the High Court, Kumar sought bail and claimed the allegations were false and his custody was no longer required as the investigation was over.

The Delhi Police had opposed Kumar’sp bail plea, saying that releasing him on bail could influence the probe.

Kumar is accused of assaulting Maliwal at the Chief Minister’s residence in New Delhi on May 13.