Explained: Why Raj Kundra, Ryan Thorpe's bail pleas in connection to porn film case were rejected by Mumbai court

On 28 July, a magistrate’s court in Mumbai court rejected the bail pleas of businessman Raj Kundra and his associate Ryan Thorpe in a case related to alleged production and streaming of pornographic content through apps. Kundra and Thorpe were arrested by the Mumbai Crime Branch on 19 July, and are presently in judicial custody. Here is taking a look at the reasons the court cited while rejecting the bail pleas ‘Detrimental to society’s health’ The alleged offense for which Kundra and Thorpe were arrested last month is “detrimental to the health of our society”, and “societal interest in the prosecution of a crime which has a wider social dimension cannot be overlooked”,  Mumbai court said. While rejecting their bail pleas, the court also said that the police had followed the legal procedure. The detailed order passed by Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate S B Bhajipale became available on Tuesday. Reasons for arrest already mentioned by the investigating officer The accused have also moved the Bombay High Court challenging their arrest, pleading that the police did not issue a notice as required under section 41A of the Code of Criminal Procedure before the arrest. The high court has reserved its order. But the magistrate noted that the investigating officer (IO) had recorded reason for the arrest, as required. “This court on 20 July (during a remand hearing) came to the conclusion that the arrest of the accused is as per law,” the judge said. “The IO has already mentioned the reasons for the arrest of both the accused. In such circumstances, it cannot be said that the accused are entitled to bail,” the magistrate said. Probe isn’t over yet As per the IO’s reply, Pradeep Bakshi, an accused who is a relative of Mr Kundra, was on the run. Also, a huge amount of data was collected by the police and its analysis was still going on, the court said. “No doubt, the accused are in judicial custody. However, taking the accused in judicial custody by refusing police custody does not mean that the investigation is complete," the court said in its order, as quoted by India Today. Accused may tamper with evidence The accused had deleted some incriminating data and there was every possibility that they may tamper with evidence if released on bail, the court said. (With inputs from Press Trust of India)