Lakshadweep filmmaker Ayesha Sultana has denied the island administration’s allegations within the Kerala High Court that she was not cooperating with the investigation within the sedition case in opposition to her, claiming that the authority was attempting to make her appear to be an “anti-national”. was in a rush. .
The Lakshadweep administration, in its latest reply opposing the plea for quashing of the FIR in opposition to Sultana, mentioned the filmmaker was not cooperating within the investigation, deleted particulars of varied communications and paperwork from his cell phone after registering the case. refused to supply. requested by the police.
Responding to the administration’s allegations, the filmmaker – represented by advocate KA Akbar – has claimed that he had not eliminated any materials from his cellphone that was confiscated by the police with none prior discover or path.
She has additional claimed that after her cellphone and her brother’s laptop computer have been confiscated on June 25, the gadgets weren’t produced earlier than the trial courtroom until July 15 and he or she didn’t know in whose custody it was all.
“The allegation that on checking the cell phone of the petitioner (Sultana), some media recordsdata and the chat historical past of social media platforms have been deleted, is a blatant lie.
The petitioner has not deleted any chat from his social media or some other internet-based platform. The allegation of deleting the textual content message is fake.
It additional mentioned that the non-production of digital elements was with the intention of “putting false evidence” in opposition to him.
“Since the chain of custody has been lost, the intent of the prosecution is very clear. They will tamper with mobile phones..,” she has alleged and mentioned that each the gadgets have been despatched to a forensic lab in Gujarat as an alternative of laboratories in Hyderabad, Chennai or Kerala as per the prevailing apply.
In its reply, it mentioned, “The prosecution deliberately bypassed the chain of custody of both the confiscated electronic devices in this case, giving them an opportunity to set up any material of their own free will and choice, which is the content of the petitioner. is injurious to interest.” .
Opposing the allegation that he didn’t provide the paperwork demanded by the police, Sultana argued that the courtroom had not directed him handy over his passport to the investigating officer.
He additionally claimed that he had given scanned shade copies and photocopies of all paperwork together with his passport, Aadhar card and so on, because the originals have been essential for each day actions and alleged that he didn’t cooperate within the investigation. is fake and meant to mislead the courtroom.
The filmmaker termed the allegation that his philanthropic actions have been anti-national.
“Even after disclosing the people behind the charitable activity and services rendered by the petitioner with the help of friends through the local police officers, this investigation never looked into such aspects and treated the petitioner as an anti-national. is being established in, for which money was received for its construction. seditious remarks,” he added.
“The petitioner isn’t indulging in any anti-social, anti-national or some other felony or civil actions.
“The petitioner is going through such harassment and trauma, raids, lengthy interrogation for a number of days, solely as a result of the petitioner criticized the administrator, who was not following any of the quarantine guidelines of himself or his staff ,” she claimed.
In his reply, he once more urged the courtroom to quash the FIR and the proceedings emanating from it.
Earlier, the High Court had refused to remain additional proceedings within the sedition case registered in opposition to Sultana.
While contemplating a petition filed by Sultana in search of quashing of the FIR lodged in opposition to him by the Kavaratti police, the High Court had mentioned that the investigation within the matter was at a preliminary stage and extra time could also be required to finish the investigation.
Sultana has received anticipatory bail within the sedition case.
A case beneath sections 124-A (sedition) and 153B (hate speech) of the IPC was registered on June 9 based mostly on a petition by a political chief from Kavaratti.
.
With inputs from TheIndianEXPRESS
