Raj Kundra has moved to the high court and the case has been taken by Parinam Law Associates, stating three points. These include that his arrest was not legal, the IPC section against him was an error on part of Mumbai Police and there is no explicit sexual activity in the videos which can be classified as pornography.

Bollywood actress, Shilpa Shetty’s husband Raj Kundra was arrested by the Mumbai Police on July 19 on the allegation of making pornographic films. On Monday, Kundra moved to high court after the magistrate court, extended his police custody till July 27. It was reported that Kundra’s lawyers appealed to the court saying that the arrest over the porn is illegal.

Kundra’s lawyers said that the 4000 pages charge sheet that the Mumbai Police has filed against Kundra and others involved in the alleged porn racket has no alleged mention of pornography, an allegation that Kundra’s other lawyer Abad Ponda earlier raised. Ponda had earlier raised. Ponda had earlier said that the arrest did not follow the due procedure as he was not issued a proper notice of appearance under Section 41A o to CrPC.

He further contested that the videos made by Raj, and owned by a UK firm were though vulgar but not pornographic. The videos for the Hotshots app did not show explicit sexual content.

As the local magistrate extended Raj’s custody till July 27, his lawyers said that the arrest is illegal, as he was arrested over a recorded statement, and was not issued a proper notice of appearance under Section 41A of CrPC, the petition challenging the magistrate court order said.

The pleas also said that the particular content “does not depict direct explicit sexual acts and sexual intercourse but shows only material in the form of short movies which are lascivious or appeal to the prurient interest of the persons at best.”

Kundra has been booked under sections 354(C) (Voyeurism), 292 (sale of obscene content), 420(cheating) of the IPC, and Sections 67, 67A (transmission of sexually explicit material)of the IT Act and the Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act. The plea also found some loopholes in these sections which have been invoked against Raj Kundra.

Chief Metropolitan Magistrate did not consider that the police have wrongly invoked IPC provisions where Information Technology Act applies, the plea said.

Website | + posts

Global Tribune : News 24 X 7
National News , International News, Regional News, Political News, Social News, Sports News, Crime News, Entertainment News, Fashion News and Many More ...

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here