Order Reserved By Bombay HC In Raj Kundra’s Plea challenging His Arrest

Mumbai: According to a Times Now report, Ripu Sudan Kundra alias Raj Kundra and Ryan Thorpe had challenged the legality of their arrest in the Bombay HC.

Kundra told the Bombay HC that the police didn’t serve him a notice for appearance before the investigating officer under CrPC 41A, instead forced him to sign the notice post his arrest.

While arguing the case, the prosecution told the court that, ‘the Police have found 68 adult content videos on the laptop of Kundra. There was a PowerPoint presentation on Kundra’s laptop, the PowerPoint had details of the HotShots app. It has a financial projection, marketing strategies and what the app is all about. On Kundra’s personal laptop, police found a film script with sexual content.’

The PP further added that ‘Kundra deleted his Iphone iCloud account. Some emails were revived from iCloud. WhatsApp groups and chats were found on Kundra’s phone.

He had chats with Umesh Kamat, Ryan, Pradeep Bakshi and others. Bollyfame takeover and Bollyfame tactic apps were also discussed. We recovered user files, emails, face time, log, contacts, browsing history from Kundra’s phone and laptop. Details like subscribers’ names, invoices, financial transactions were also recovered. The other accused Ryan deleted evidence. Ryan, Kundra, Bakshi, Kamat, Bollyfame technician, and accountant of the company had WhatsApp chats. Ryan deleted these chats and as he used a OnePlus phone, we are unable to recover these chats. Can the investigating agency be a mute spectator when the accused are destroying evidence,” the PP said in reply to Kundra’s lawyer who claimed that his arrest was illegal.

Raj Kundra’s lawyer argued that 2 harddisks and laptops were seized. Nowhere in the panchnama it is mentioned that evidence was destroyed. If the laptop and hard disks etc., are seized, how will the accused delete anything. 22 people from the police’s side were present during the panchnama, how can anyone delete anything. On 23rd July IPC 201 was added. Deleting the content was not even mentioned in the remand. It was never the ground of their remand,” Kundra’s lawyer argued.

The HC Court has now reserved the plea for orders.

Source: Times Now