‘Is he a terrorist,’ lawyer asks after Kundra denied bail

A metropolitan magistrate court in Mumbai on Wednesday dismissed the bail plea filed by 45-year-old businessman and Shilpa Shetty’s husband Raj Kundra. Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Sudhir Bhajipale was hearing the bail plea filed by Raj Kundra represented by senior counsel advocate Abad Ponda. On hearing both the sides, the magistrate rejected Kundra and his […]

by Urvashi Khona - July 29, 2021, 5:56 am

A metropolitan magistrate court in Mumbai on Wednesday dismissed the bail plea filed by 45-year-old businessman and Shilpa Shetty’s husband Raj Kundra. Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Sudhir Bhajipale was hearing the bail plea filed by Raj Kundra represented by senior counsel advocate Abad Ponda. On hearing both the sides, the magistrate rejected Kundra and his aide Ryan Thorpe’s bail plea in a case related to the alleged production and distribution of pornographic content. While submitting his side, advocate Abad Ponda asked: “Is Kundra a terrorist? Has he terrorised anyone?”

Advocate Abad Ponda filed the bail plea on the grounds that this was an old case where chargesheet was filed and nine other accused were out on bail and Kundra has been cooperating in the investigation; thus his custody is not required. Abad Ponda submitted, “Charge-sheet in the case is filed already in April 2020 and maximum punishment is seven years. All the accused are out on bail. So I plead bail should be granted.”

To this Mumbai Police, opposing the bail plea, submitted in the court that if Raj Kundra is granted bail, then tampering of evidence can happen. Also, as some statements of victims are yet to be recorded, they may fear to come forward and Kundra can use his money and muscle power on them. Investigating Officer, police Inspector Kiran Bidve standing in the witness box told the court, “Kundra can destroy evidences once he’s out. Last night in Malwani police station, the case was registered; so slowly victims are coming forward. If Kundra is out, he can use money and muscle power to silence the victims. He can tamper with the evidence and witnesses. If he gets bail, then victims will fear to come and speak, If bail is granted ro Raj Kundra, he can help his brother-in-law Pardeep Bakshi and Ryan, who was the IT head. We have seized electronic devices, Ryan can destroy the evidence. We need to probe with the help of Ryan. The accused are active in the case and victims will fear if bail is granted and at this point their statement needs to be recorded and financial transactions need to be probed. Thus, we appeal not to grant bail for Raj Kundra and Ryan Thorpe.”

To this, Kundra’s counsel Abad Ponda replied, “Am I a terrorist??? has any of the victim till date from February to date in charge-sheet or statement said that Kundra has threatened or so!!” Police said that Kundra is a British national and so could flee the country to avoid prosecution. Ponda replied: “Police knew even when they filed the charge-sheet in February that he was a British national and his passport is already with the police. Further terms and conditions can be imposed.”

Public prosecutor Ekanath Dhamal argues that the accused are rich and influential, and said: “Needy women were being forced into this crime. Many victims are coming forward and that if bail is granted to Kundra, then they might not come forward. The accused are rich and influential people.” 

Meanwhile, trouble for Kundra increased as, according to sources, four of his employees have turned witnesses against him. The Mumbai crime branch has lodged a fresh FIR in connection with a pornography case and named producers of businessman Raj Kundra’s company as well as actress Gehana Vashishth in the new case, a police official said on Wednesday. 

The case was registered by the crime branch’s property cell at the Malwani police station on Tuesday after an actress approached the police and alleged she was forced to shoot for a pornographic film for the HotShots app. The FIR was registered under various Indian Penal Code (IPC) sections, including 420 (cheating), 392 (punishment for robbery), 393 (attempt to commit robbery), and provisions of the Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act and the Information Technology Act, the official added.

Kundra has also filed a petition in the Bombay High Court, challenging his arrest in the case and calling for an “immediate release”. The petition claims that his arrest is “illegal”. On Tuesday, the Bombay High Court had adjourned the hearing; the matter will be heard again on Thursday.