‘Vaid’ held for video ‘favouring’ Pakistan gets bail

Less than two months after a “vaid” was accused of “wrongly creating a video involving Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Home Minister Amit Shah and presenting it in Pakistan’s favour”, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has granted bail to him. “The prosecution is yet to lead evidence to prove the involvement of the petitioner in the crime,” Justice N.S. Shekhawat of the high court asserted while granting him the relief.

Advertisement

In his petition filed through senior advocate Bipan Ghai with counsel Nikhil Ghai and Paras Talwar, petitioner-accused Mushtaq Ahmed was seeking regular bail in FIR registered on May 15 for acts endangering the sovereignty, unity, and integrity of India and another offence under Sections 152, 197(1)(d) of the BNS at city police station in Fatehabad. The Bench was told that the police after examining the petitioner’s passport was found he had never visited Pakistan in the last 35 years.

“Even the video in question was not created by the petitioner, but he had only forwarded it. There is no evidence to connect him with the commission of alleged crime. Besides this, the petitioner is a senior citizen and suffering from various old age related diseases apparent from the medical records,” his counsel added.

The Bench was also told that the petitioner undertook not to commit any such offence in future after tendering unconditional apology. The State counsel, on the other hand, “vehemently” opposed the submissions on the ground that “serious allegations have been leveled against the present petitioner and he does not deserve the concession of bail by this court.”

After going through the documents and rival contentions, Justice Shekhawat asserted that the petitioner-accused in the present case was arrested on May 17 and was in custody since then. “At this stage, nothing is to be recovered from the petitioner and the investigation is almost complete. Even otherwise, the petitioner is a senior citizen and deserves sympathetic consideration. Thus, the further custody of the petitioner will not serve any useful purpose,” the court added.

Without commenting on the merits of the case, Justice Shekhawat allowed the petition and him to be released on bail.