Delhi High Court rejects anticipatory bail for YouTuber Ajeet Bharti over caste remarks
The Delhi High Court denied anticipatory bail to YouTuber Ajeet Bharti, who faces charges for alleged caste-based insults against Dalit leader Chandra Shekhar Aazad.
In a Thursday ruling, the Delhi High Court refused anticipatory bail to YouTuber Ajeet Bharti, citing evidence that his statements may violate the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Prevention of Atrocities Act. The complaint, lodged by the Azad Samaj Party (Kanshi Ram), alleges that Bharti's video contained caste-based, humiliating and sexually degrading remarks about party president and Bhim Army chief Chandra Shekhar Aazad, as well as about B. R. Ambedkar, while discussing the August anti-reservation protests at Jantar Mantar.
In addition to the SC/ST Act, Bharti is charged under the Information Technology Act and sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita relating to group enmity and criminal intimidation. He argues the comments were provoked by social-media attacks on his married sister and denies using casteist slurs. A prior sessions-court denial of bail on September 7 was also upheld. The protests, originally permitted at Ramlila Maidan, saw thousands gather at Jantar Mantar and several arrests.
Why it matters
The ruling highlights tensions over free speech, caste politics and legal limits on online commentary in India.
How the sides frame it
HIGH AGREEMENTBoth camps report the court’s denial of anticipatory bail, but left-leaning coverage stresses the alleged humiliating caste-based remarks and Bharti’s claim of provocation, while centrist coverage emphasizes the court’s legal reasoning and the statutory bar on bail.
LEFT
Left-leaning coverage highlights the alleged caste-based, humiliating and sexually degrading remarks and frames the case as a serious violation of the SC/ST Act, noting Bharti’s claim of provocation.
CENTER
Centrist coverage frames the story around the court’s refusal of bail, stressing the prima-facie finding under the SC/ST Act and the statutory bar on granting anticipatory bail.
The left emphasises
- caste-based, humiliating and sexually degrading remarks
- may violate the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Prevention of Atrocities Act
- Bharti argues the comments were provoked by social-media attacks
In this story
