Supreme Court Dismisses AAP Leader Somnath Bharti's Plea To Transfer Criminal Case From UP to Delhi

The case, arising from Bharti's remarks about Uttar Pradesh's healthcare and educational facilities while campaigning in Prayagraj in December 2020, involves allegations of criminal intimidation and promoting enmity between groups.

A bench of Justice MM Sundresh and Justice Aravind Kumar in the morning session questioned the basis for seeking the transfer, with Justice Sundresh remarking, “He is an MLA; he can very well travel.”

The matter was passed over in the morning at the request of Bharti's counsel. When it was taken up again in the afternoon session, the Court dismissed the plea.

Background

Last year, bench of Justices SK Kaul and Ahsanuddin Amanullah had issued a notice regarding in the transfer plea and temporarily stayed the proceedings in Sultanpur. The case originated from Bharti's comments on the condition of a government healthcare unit in Uttar Pradesh, which he made while campaigning in Prayagraj in December 2020.

A widely circulated video allegedly showed Bharti commenting on unsanitary conditions, particularly in a hospital where puppies were reportedly found in the doctor's room. According to reports, Bharti allegedly stated, “though children were taking birth in these hospitals, they were not of humans but of dogs.” This led to an FIR against him on charges of criminal intimidation and promoting enmity between groups.

Following these remarks, Bharti was arrested and later produced before a Special Court, where he was sent to judicial custody. An additional FIR was filed alleging that Bharti used abusive language toward Uttar Pradesh police officials and made derogatory comments about the Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh, Yogi Adityanath.

During the previous Supreme Court hearings on the transfer petition, Senior Advocate Siddharth Dave, representing Bharti, argued that the criminal cases against Bharti stemmed from political motivations. Dave expressed concern over Bharti's safety, asserting that the leader faced threats from members of the current ruling party in Uttar Pradesh and that a fatal attack was a possibility if he were to attend proceedings in the state.

“We want a transfer. There are serious apprehensions that we have. The threats are from MLAs in the Government (Uttar Pradesh) presently,” Dave stated, supporting Bharti's request for transfer.

Further, the transfer petition highlighted the perceived threat to Bharti's life and his belief that political retribution would prevent a fair trial in Uttar Pradesh. Dave also noted that a chargesheet had been filed, and cognizance taken, in at least one of the cases.

Case no. – TP (Crl.) No. 256/2023

Case Title – Som Nath Bharti v. State of Uttar Pradesh