In May 2017, the police had told the Delhi High Court that the AAP minister used to harass and beat his wife Lipika Mitra. (File photo)
The Delhi High Court on Tuesday quashed an FIR accusing AAP MLA Somnath Bharti of domestic violence. Justice Chander Shekhar allowed Bharti’s plea to quash the criminal case after noting that Bharti and his wife Lipika Mitra are living happily together. The court also noted that the woman has no objection if the FIR is quashed.
It had earlier allowed Bharti’s wife to withdraw her petition seeking cancellation of the bail granted to him in the domestic violence case in view of the settlement of their marital dispute.
Mitra had on June 10, 2015 filed a complaint against him with the Delhi Commission for Women and an FIR was lodged by the police on September 9, 2015 for allegedly subjecting her to domestic violence and trying to kill her.
In May 2017, the police had told the Delhi High Court that the AAP minister used to harass and beat his wife Lipika Mitra, who has sought cancellation of bail to Bharti in a case related to domestic violence. The Delhi Police made the submission before Justice IS Mehta, who is hearing Mitra's plea seeking cancellation of Bharti's bail on several grounds, including that the trial court had not applied its mind while granting the relief to the AAP legislator.
The police, which has filed its affidavit following the court's direction, also submitted that the AIIMS medical board has opined that the scars on the woman's body could be due to dog bites and burn injuries.
"Somnath Bharti used to harass, beat and abuse the petitioner (wife) from the very beginning of the marriage, despite having knowledge about the frail health conditions of the petitioner.
"The medical record produced by the petitioner was examined and verified and it shows that she was suffering from diabetes and hypertension at the time of pregnancy," it said.The MLA, who was granted bail on October 7, 2015, had denied the allegations levelled against him by his wife.
Lipika had moved the high court challenging the bail order, saying it was almost like a verdict and the trial court had relied on the case diary which allegedly should not have been done at that stage.