New Delhi [India], September 15 : Patiala House Court on Tuesday granted 3 weeks' interim bail to Swatantra Bhardwaj after imposing strict conditions. His conduct will be observed during the interim bail period. His conduct will be seen at the time of hearing the regular bail application or extension of interim bail. 
He has been arrested in a case of alleged assault on Sanjay Azad, who belongs to the SC community, during the CJP Protest at Jantar Mantar on June 23.
The court has kept the regular bail application pending for hearing on October 6. The court has directed the police to file a report on the conduct of Swatantra Bhardwaj. 
Special Judge (SC/ST Act) SPS Laler granted 3 weeks' interim bail to Swatantra Bhardwaj on a bail bond of Rs. 50000 and a surety bond of the like amount. However, the court has imposed strict conditions, including observation of his conduct.
While granting interim bail to Accused the Special Judge also referred to the Supreme Court order to the State of Haryana for production of a murder accused who, after getting bail, took a victory March.
The court said, "Public displays of that kind, whether on the street or on social media, do not augur well for society or for law and order, and they erode public's confidence in the administration of justice. Bail is an expression of the Court’s trust, and it is not a trophy to be displayed."
In context of the present case the court said, "Weighing all the circumstances, the Court takes into account that the applicant has been in custody for a little over ten days, a period that should have afforded him time for reflection."
The Court noted that his custodial interrogation is complete, and the offences carry a maximum sentence of seven years. The principal concern is the safety of the complainant and his minor daughter, which can be secured by appropriate conditions.
"In the considered view of this Court, the duty under the Act to protect the victim and the duty under Article 21 to safeguard personal liberty are best reconciled by releasing the applicant on interim bail for three weeks on stringent conditions. His conduct during that period will be observed, and his prayer for regular bail will then be considered in its light. Whatever is to be decided about the incident of 23.06.2026 must be decided in a court of law, on evidence, and not in public or on social media," Special Judge Laler ordered on September 15.
The court has restrained Swatantra Bhardwaj from making social media posts or giving interviews.
“The applicant shall not make, publish, post, upload or share any statement, comment, video, podcast, interview, reel or post concerning the facts of this case, his defence, or the complainant and his family, on social media, in the electronic or print media, or on any other public platform. He shall not have conversation in this regard with anyone from electronic/print media or social media," the court directed.
The court further directed that the accused shall not, directly or indirectly, contact the complainant, his minor daughter, any member of his family, or any prosecution witness, including by telephone or by electronic means.
He shall not threaten, induce or influence any of them in any manner. The court has listed the application on 06.10.2026 for consideration on  grant/dismissal of regular bail/extension of interim bail.
The court directed that the Investigating Officer shall file a report on 06.10.2026 as regards any violation of bail conditions. The Counsel for the complainant may also apprise the Court on the next date as regards violation of any bail condition."
The court also raised a finger on the manner of investigation, which left significant ground uncovered. 
The court pointed out, " The podcast forms the central basis of the State’s opposition, and its authenticity is disputed. Yet the reply on bail does not state whether the person who manages the channel has been examined, whether the original footage has been requisitioned, or whether the electronic material has been sent for forensic examination."
" The reply is equally silent on several other matters, namely CCTV footage of the protest site; any recording made by Delhi Police personnel deployed at the gathering; the applicant’s call detail records and location data; information from the social media service providers; the statements of the complainant’s companions and of the police personnel who apprehended the accused; and the present position of co-accused Suraj Kumar," the court highlighted.
The court ordered, " Being a Special Court under the Act of 1989, the investigating agency is directed to conduct the investigation expeditiously."
The court directed the investigating officer (IO) to collect and preserve CCTV footage of the Jantar Mantar protest site, particularly at or around the place of incident for 23.06.2026, from all available government and private sources. The IO is further directed to collect the video recordings, photographs and surveillance material, if any, made by Delhi Police personnel deployed to monitor the gathering, including any recordings made to identify persons with past antecedents, and in particular the footage of the incident.
The court also directed to obtain and analyse the call detail records and tower location data of the mobile number(s) used by the applicant, from the date of commencement of the protest until the date of his arrest.
The investigation officer is further directed to requisition from the service providers of the social media platforms concerned subscriber and account details, upload logs, IP addresses and original files. It shall also seek preservation of that data pending investigation.
The court has also directed the police to examine the person who manages or operates that channel, and establish the source, date and circumstances of the recording.
The court has asked for CFSL Examination of the pen drive, the podcast, and the videos relied upon by both sides, to determine whether they are genuine or have been morphed or artificially generated, and obtain certification as required under Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023.
The police have been directed to obtain subscriber details of the numbers from which the "threatening messages" shown in the complainant’s screenshots were sent, identify the persons responsible, and ascertain whether any of them is connected with the applicant.
The court has also asked the police to report the present status of co-accused Suraj Kumar and the steps taken to identify the remaining associates; and to follow up on the opinion of the Medical Board.
The court has called for a status report from the IO addressing each of the above points. As stated earlier, the report shall also cover the conduct of the applicant during the period of interim bail, including any social media activity attributable to him, and the action taken on the threats reported by the complainant and his minor daughter.