AltNews co-founder Mohammed Zubair argues for bail after police add charges of conspiracy, evidence destruction and FCRA violations

Police produced Mr. Zubair in court and sought 14 days judicial custody for him, noting they may need further police remand at a later stage

Even as the Delhi Police on July 2 submitted before a Patiala House court that they had added charges of criminal conspiracy, evidence destruction and violations of the Foreign Controbution Regulation Act (FCRA) against Alt-News cofounder Mohd Zubair — a day after they seized his laptop from Bengaluru, Advocate Vrinda Grover moved a bail application for Mr. Zubair, raising grave apprehension that his device may be tampered with.

Ms. Grover submitted before CMM Snigdha Sarvaria that the Delhi Police Special Cell had travelled all the way to Bengaluru to seize his devices but did not take a technician with them who could generate the hash value for the device.

“It is standard practice while seizing devices to generate this value so it can he known if there has been any tampering. Moreover, they have in the seizure memo also said that they have not sealed the seized devices as they need to analyse it. We are not disputing that analysis needed but snactity and integrity of data has to be preserved,” Ms. Grover submitted.

Mr. Zubair moved a bail application in the case after the Delhi Police produced him in court on July 2 upon the expiry of their police custody. The police said they do not need his custody for the time being and hence sought 14 days judicial custody, after which the bail plea was moved.

In their application, the police said they were adding Section 201 (evidence destruction) of IPC because he had brought a “wiped phone” to the interrogation; 120B of the IPC (criminal conspiracy); and Section 35 of the FCRA because they had discovered alleged transactions from foreign countries.

Arguing for bail, Ms. Grover firstly reiterated the points made earlier that the offences initially added (153A and 295A of IPC) are not made out. She went on to argue on the charges added on Saturday one by one.

On the subject of deleting things from his phone, Ms. Grover submitted that the phone in question was not the one from which the tweet was made. “It js private property. I can do whatever I want with it. I was not told this phone is required for the case and neither was I asked to bring any phone to the questioning. No aspersion can be cast for this. 201 is for evidence. This is not evidence. This is not a police state.”