The Delhi High Court on Thursday dismissed YouTuber Ajeet Bharti’s anticipatory bail plea in a case over alleged caste-based remarks against Nagina MP Chandrashekhar Azad, saying prima facie a case under the SC/ST Act was made out against him.

Justice Saurabh Banerjee said the case fell under Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and, therefore, Mr. Bharti was barred from seeking pre-arrest bail.

The case relates to a video which Mr. Bharti allegedly uploaded on August 22.

According to the FIR, the video had around 23,100 views when the case was registered and contained caste-based abuses, slurs and derogatory remarks aimed at Mr Azad, who is a Scheduled Caste member. The complaint also alleged remarks against Dr. B.R. Ambedkar and members of the SC and ST communities.

The court said it had watched the relevant portions of the video in chambers and examined its transcript before deciding the plea.

It noted that Mr. Bharti’s counsel had admitted that he did not belong to an SC or ST community. His counsel had also accepted that the video was posted on a public social media platform and was therefore made available “within public view”.

The court rejected the argument that Mr. Azad had to be physically present when the remarks were made. It said content uploaded on the internet was freely accessible and could be viewed, heard and shared by anyone.

On the contents of the video, the court said Mr. Bharti had repeatedly used caste names and slurs while referring directly and indirectly to Mr. Azad.

The remarks, the court said, were not merely stray or general comments. “They were clear references to caste, and explicit invocation of ideas of caste superiority prevalent in society, that too, with reference to the institution of marriage, which also represents age old notions of the hierarchy of the castes...,” the court said.

Mr. Bharti had argued that the remarks were made after he was provoked by someone online. The court rejected the submission, saying such provocation could not shield him from the alleged offences.

“Be that as it may, the said ‘provocation’, if any, was not by the named individual. It is also nowhere the case of the applicant that he has subsequently issued any clarification/ explanation/ retraction/ apologies,” the court remarked.

Mr. Bharti had approached the High Court after a trial court rejected his anticipatory bail plea on September 7.