Delhi Court Denies Anticipatory Bail to Influencer Ajeet Bharti in Caste Remarks Case
A Delhi district court has denied anticipatory bail to social media influencer Ajeet Bharti, who faces criminal charges over alleged casteist and abusive remarks.
2 reports on this incident · first at Sep 9, 2026, 3:33 a.m. ET
Earlier reports
Sep 9, 2026, 3:33 a.m. ETFirst report
Delhi Court Denies Bail to Influencer Ajeet Bharti in Caste Remarks Case
A Delhi district court has denied anticipatory bail to social media influencer Ajeet Bharti in a criminal case over allegations that he used caste-based and abusive language, made objectionable remarks about Nagina MP Chandrashekhar Azad and BR Ambedkar, used sexually degrading language against women, and issued threats, according to the New Indian Express.
The court's decision, reported on September 9, 2026, comes at the charging stage of the proceedings. The case is criminal in nature, as reported by the New Indian Express.
Was this report accurate and useful?
Sources
Revision history
- Version 19 Sept 2026, 07:38current
First published.
- Version 19 Sept 2026, 07:33current
First published.
How we work
This site models an investigative reporter rather than a wire desk. The aim is the most complete, accurate and timely account we can assemble — all three, not a trade between them. Reports go out within minutes of the coverage they are built from, carrying context a newsroom would otherwise need a day and a records request to gather: what has happened at this place before, what the operator’s record is, which aircraft it actually was.
Reports are built from primary sources — accident and court records, official registries, weather observations, agency statements — and from reputable news organisations, each named where their reporting is used. Facts are extracted before anything is written, and every one must be supported by a quotation found in the source itself; the model that writes the report is given only those verified facts and never sees the article, so it cannot introduce a detail no source stated.
Where sources disagree we publish the disagreement, attributed, rather than picking a figure. Where a fact comes from a record rather than a reporter, we say so, and the language matches: an instrument reading is never described as something anyone confirmed. Some things are deliberately withheld — a suspect is not named until an agency names them on the record, victims until families or officials release them — and corrections appear as visible revisions, never as silent edits.
None of that makes a report true. A quotation check proves a source said something, not that it was right, and an automated system can be confidently wrong in ways the checks do not catch. If something here is wrong, the feedback above is how it gets found. The full methodology, including what we refuse to publish.