Bombay High Court rejects Gehana Vasisth’s pre-arrest bail plea

Gehana Vasisth moved the anticipatory bail application apprehending arrest in the third FIR registered against her in the porn film case.

The Bombay High Court has rejected actor Gehana Vasisth’s anticipatory bail application in the porn films case. Bollywood actor Shilpa Shetty's husband Raj Kundra is also an accused in another FIR in the porn films case.Vasisth moved the anticipatory bail application apprehending arrest in the third FIR registered against her. She was arrested and jailed for a few months in the two earlier cases.The case was filed after the police received a complaint stating that Vasisth, who was allegedly the director of porn films, threatened, coerced and lured women with money to act in “obscene film videos”.The complainant had claimed that she was coerced to act in obscene videos for Vasisth's films, which were uploaded on an adult mobile application.Advocate Abhishek Yende, appearing for Vasisth, had argued before the High Court that the complainant had previously acted in several web series. He had further submitted that whatever could have been recovered from Vasisth had already been recovered from her when she was in custody. He had added that the FIR was registered against her while she was in custody.ALSO READ: Bombay High Court reserves order on Gehana Vasisth’s pre-arrest bail plea The court asked the Mumbai Police to explain why Vasisth's custody was required in the present case. Subsequently, the court also sought to know why Section 370 (offence of trafficking) of the Indian Penal Code was not invoked.In response, Public Prosecutor Prajakta Shinde submitted on Tuesday that they did not require Vasisth's custody as they only required certain contracts signed with companies and various artists.However, the very next day, the public prosecutor informed the court that they had filed an application in the lower court seeking to add the offence of trafficking (Section 370) under the Indian Penal Code in the third FIR.Yende subsequently contended that Section 370 ought not to have been added as the complainant in the present FIR had purportedly given her no-objection to act in the web series, which was recorded after she had signed agreements with Vasisth.ALSO READ: Porn racket case: Why Section 370 not invoked against Gehana Vasisth, Bombay HC asks police