The Supreme Court on Wednesday agreed to hear the Maharashtra government’s plea challenging a Bombay High Court order granting bail to a lawyer who is accused of illegally possessing the call detail records of actor Nawazuddin Siddiqui’s wife. The hearing date has been set for April 6.
A bench comprising Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justice AM Khanwilkar had agreed to hear the submission of Maharashtra counsel Nishant Katneshwar’s appeal on an urgent basis.
On March 21, the Bombay High Court had directed the Thane Police to release advocate Rizwan Siddiqui from their custody. He was arrested on March 16 for allegedly ordering others accused in the case to procure the call detail records of Nawazuddin Siddiqui’s wife illegally.
In January, the Thane Police had arrested three private detectives, one of whom is believed to have helped Rizwan Siddiqui get hold of the records. The police have arrested 11 suspects, including well-known private detective Rajani Pandit, for allegedly procuring call detail records illegally and selling them.
The high court had accused the Thane Police of acting in a “high-handed manner” and not following the “due process of law” in arresting Rizwan Siddiqui. The bench had also directed the most senior officials of the Thane Police and the Maharashtra Home Affairs Department to investigate the workings of the Thane Police and take action against officials concerned if found necessary.
Rizwan Siddiqui’s wife Tasneem Siddiqui had moved the Bombay High Court, claiming that he had been wrongfully arrested without a notice. She had claimed that the Thane Crime Branch had summoned her husband on February 14 but arrested him on March 16 from his office while recording his statement.
While Tasneem Siddiqui’s plea claimed the Thane Police had not given her husband any notice under Section 41(A) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which specifies guidelines for a prosecuting agency to arrest a person without a warrant, the Maharashtra government claimed the police had tried to serve Rizwan Siddiqui the notice but he had refused to accept it.
The High Court, however, had observed that the police had issued the notice on March 15 for him to appear before it on March 17 at 11 am, but had arrested him before he could visit the police station.
Limited-time offer: Big stories, small price. Keep independent media alive. Become a Scroll member today!
Our journalism is for everyone. But you can get special privileges by buying an annual Scroll Membership. Sign up today!