Bombay HC grants interim protection from arrest to Raj Kundra in 2020 case – Hindustan Times

The Bombay high court (HC) on Wednesday granted interim protection from arrest for one week to businessman Raj Kundra in a cybercrime case from last year, which pertained to obscene content shown on OTT platforms. Kundra had approached the HC after a sessions court rejected his anticipatory bail application earlier this month.

The businessman is currently in lodged in Arthur Road jail for his alleged involvement in a pornographic film racket which came to light in February, after the HC rejected his plea challenging his remand on July 19 in that case.

Kundra’s application stated that two other accused in the case had been granted protection and he sought the same on grounds of parity. The HC granted the state’s request for a week to respond.

Kundra’s lawyer Shishir Gupte informed the single bench of justice S K Shinde during the anticipatory bail application that the First Information Report (FIR) registered by the cyber cell of Mumbai police in October 2020 did not mention Kundra’s name, and he was falsely implicated by the police.

The FIR was registered under Indian Penal Code section dealing with sale of obscene material, sections of the Information Technology Act which deal with transmission of sexually explicit material and provisions of the Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act.

Gupte submitted that the Cyber police was trying to establish his connection with a mobile application, Hotshots. The app is one of the many that is currently under the scanner of the Crime Branch, investigating the February pornography racket.

The CB has arrested at least 11 persons – including Kundra and associate Ryan Thorpe — in connection with the racket, in which allegedly pornographic films and videos were produced and disseminated over subscription-driven websites and apps. The investigation has revealed so far that a company founded by Kundra in 2019 created Hotshots, which it later sold to a UK-based firm that is owned by Kundra’s relative, Pradeep Bakshi.

Gupte told the court that Kundra had invested in the venture for a brief period and discontinued his association in December 2019. He further stated that during this association Kundra was not involved in the contracts or content created by the company.

Gupte said that since the HC had already granted interim protection to other co-accused, Sherlyn Chopra and Poonam Pandey, and the police had already seized electronic devices belonging to Kundra in another case, his custodial interrogation was not required and hence his application for pre-arrest bail should be allowed.

Additional public prosecutor Prajakta Shinde opposed the application on the grounds that Kundra’s role in both cases was different from the co-accused and hence he could not seek similar relief.