CNN TürkFED FAİZ KARARI NE ZAMAN? Faiz İndirimi Olacak mı? Eylül 2026 FED Toplantısı Tarihi: Piyasaların Gözü ABD Merkez Bankası’nda!The Jerusalem PostIn loss for Trump, US Supreme Court won't let Postal Service restrict mail ballotsוואלהרוכב קורקינט חשמלי נפצע במהלך הרכיבה ופונה לבית החוליםBollywood HungamaSooraj Pancholi DENIES link to Disha Salian death case after CBI FIR names him alongside Aaditya Thackeray, Rhea Chakraborty: “Very unfair and extremely upsetting”PunchFULL LIST: 2026 Emmy Awards winnersESPNHow Verstappen's karting years made an F1 champion -- and prepared him for a new testESPN DeportesComisión Nacional Antimonopolio advierte multas al futbol mexicanoDaily MaverickWHAT WE’RE WATCHING: Fractured nation, fractured family: The politics and precarity of fatherhood in turbulent timesInquirerVP Trial Day 25: Ombudsman, SEC execs to testify on SALNs, businesses한겨레전임 원주시장 ‘직권남용’ 소송비 2천만원을 혈세로 지원? 반발 확산SözcüYarından itibaren geçerli olacak: Cumhuriyet tarihinde bir ilk yaşanacakUOLJapão tem mais de 100 mil pessoas com mais de 100 anos pela primeira vez
The Daily Newsstand · Free, Always
Tuesday, September 15, 2026

HC refuses immediate arrest protection to YouTuber Ajeet Bharti in SC/ST Act case

Translate

The Delhi high court on Monday declined to grant YouTuber Ajeet Bharti immediate protection from arrest in a case registered under the stringent Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, or SC/ST Act, over alleged remarks against parliamentarian and Azad Samaj Party (Kanshi Ram) leader Chandrashekhar Azad.

“Day after tomorrow [Wednesday], we will see,” Justice Saurabh Banerjee told Bharti’s counsel as he urged interim protection from arrest. Justice Banerjee said this while the court was considering adjourning a plea challenging a lower court’s September 7 order, rejecting Bharti’s anticipatory bail for Wednesday in view of non-availability of the complete copy of the First Information Report (FIR). The matter would be heard next on Wednesday.

Azad Samaj Party (Kanshi Ram)’s Delhi chief filed a case against Bharti over allegedly caste-based and abusive language against Azad and Dalit icon Bhimrao Ambedkar. The FIR alleged that Bharti used sexually degrading language against women and issued threats.

The lower court rejected Bharti’s anticipatory bail, observing that the language allegedly used in a YouTube video invoked caste hierarchy, notions of caste-based purity, and the perceived superiority of “upper” castes over “lower” castes in matters of marriage and lineage. It observed that Bharti’s statement that Azad should make himself “worthy” of marrying an upper-caste woman constituted a specific caste reference and was prima facie humiliating.

The lower court prima facie found that Section 3(1)(r) of the SC/ST Act, which deals with intentionally insulting or intimidating a member of an SC/ST community with intent to humiliate in a place within public view, was attracted. It held that the statutory bar under Section 18 of the SC/ST Act, which restricts anticipatory bail in cases attracting the Act, would apply.

View the original on Hindustan Times

KioskNews shows a cleaned-up reading view extracted from the publisher’s page — the original always lives on their site, not ours.