A Delhi Court on Monday denied anticipatory bail to YouTuber Ajeet Bharti in a case under Scheduled Caste Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

Additional Sessions Judge Saurabh Pratap Singh Laler of Patiala House Courts rejected the anticipatory bail application filed by Bharti.

Advocate Jai Anant Dehadrai appearing for Bharti said that the police has filed a status report saying that they only want to collect some electronic data.

He also defended Bharti saying that the YouTuber is not in favour of any kind of caste discrimination.

He said that assuming that the complainant is from SC/ST community, that will not be enough. He also added that Bharti's remarks were made as a reaction to someone saying something about his sister— which was grave provocation.

He argued that Bharti does not have any discriminatory feeling or did not make any caste based slur against anyone.

On the other hand, the prosecutor submitted that prima facie offence was made out against Bharti.

It was argued by the complainant's counsel that Bharti's commentary was not only abusive towards the complainant but also against the entire community.

Reportedly, Bharti was booked after he allegedly made casteist remarks on his YouTube show. However Bharti has publicly defended himself saying that he did not make any casteist remarks in his video but was responding to offensive comments against his mother/sister.

The FIR has been lodged under provisions of the SC/ST Act and Sections 196(1)(c) and 351(3) (aggravated criminal intimidation) BNS as well as Information Technology Act.

As per Section 196(1)(c) whoever organises any exercise, movement, drill or other similar activity intending that the participants in such activity shall use or be trained to use criminal force or violence or knowing it to be likely that the participants in such activity will use or be trained to use criminal force or violence, or participates in such activity intending to use or be trained to use criminal force or violence or knowing it to be likely that the participants in such activity will use or be trained to use criminal force or violence, against any religious, racial, language or regional group or caste or community and such activity for any reason whatsoever causes or is likely to cause fear or alarm or a feeling of insecurity amongst members of such religious, racial, language or regional group or caste or community, shall be punished with imprisonment which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.

Case title: STATE OF DELHI versus AJEET BHARTI