The Karnataka High Court on Thursday directed the Uttar Pradesh Police to not take punitive motion towards the Managing Director of Twitter India, restraining him from showing personally on the Ghaziabad police station for questioning over a controversial video of an assault on an aged man. Relieved.
A single-judge bench by Manish Maheshwari after Twitter government approached the court docket questioning the authorized standing of the discover issued to him on June 21 to look at Ghaziabad’s Loni Border Police Station on June 24 to probe the matter relieved.
The Karnataka High Court on Thursday took on report a writ petition filed by a Twitter India official concerning the discover of the UP Police on Wednesday.
Posting the matter for listening to on June 29, Justice G Narendra requested the police to gather any info they wanted from Maheshwari via “virtual mode”. On June 18, the manager had instructed the UP Police that he could be obtainable to reply questions in a digital format.
Maheshwari has sought quashing of UP Police’s discover to look in individual in Ghaziabad and an interim keep on him.
In his writ petition within the High Court, Maheshwari has questioned the validity of the discover issued to him by the UP Police underneath Section 41-A of the Criminal Procedure Code. He has additionally argued that he’s not a director in Twitter India as outlined by the Companies Act 2013 to be known as for questioning.
“It is relevant to note that notice is issued to an accused person under Section 41-A of CrPC. A reading of the FIR in offense number 502/2021 makes it clear that the petitioner has not been named as an accused,” stated the petition filed by Maheshwari.
The petition states that he has been issued a discover “on the wrong ground” that he’s the Managing Director of Twitter Communications India Pvt Ltd. “The petitioner is working with TCIPL as the head of revenue in charge of advertising sales. Since the petitioner is a senior employee of the company, the petitioner has been provided with a public post of “Managing Director”. However, the said designation is not with reference to section 2(5A) of the Companies Act, 2013,” the petition argued.
“Section 41-A discover can’t be issued to an officer of the corporate when an allegation is made on an organization. , as initially executed by the UP Police on June 17, the petition stated.
The petition argued that “issuance of a notice with all the attendant consequences to the representative of a company under Section 41-A of CrPC would be violative of Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India.”
.
With inputs from TheIndianEXPRESS
