Today, On 13th May, A Delhi court granted bail to the accused in the Amit Shah doctored video case. This decision follows legal proceedings and hearings related to the case. The case involves allegations of doctoring videos related to a prominent political figure. Amit Shah’s involvement drawn significant public and media interest in the matter.
New Delhi: Arun Kumar Bereddy, the individual in question, apprehended in west Delhi on May 3 for interrogation and subsequently taken into custody by the Intelligence fusion and strategic operations (IFSO) unit of the Delhi Police Special Cell, which currently investigating the matter.
A Delhi court, On Monday, approved the release on bail of Arun Kumar Bereddy, who accused of operating a social media account called ‘Spirit of Congress’ and presenting himself as a Congress national coordinator for Telangana on platform X. The case pertains to the alleged dissemination of a fabricated video involving Union home minister Amit Shah.
Read Also: [Amit Shah’s Doctored Video Case] High Court Denies Lunch Motion Moved By Delhi Police
Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Nabeela Wali stated,
“Bail is granted to the applicant/accused Arun Kumar Bereddy upon furnishing bail bonds worth Rs. 50,000/- along with one surety of equal amount.”
Bereddy, On May 3, arrested by the Delhi Police Special Cell in connection with a case. Bereddy, through his lawyer Eesha Bakshi, filed a bail application stating that he had provided all the necessary information to the investigating agency and had no direct involvement in the allegations mentioned in the First Information Report (FIR). He expressed his willingness to cooperate with the investigation.
Granting bail to Bereddy, the court acknowledged that the main accusation against him being the administrator of a WhatsApp group where the alleged fake video first shared. The court also noted that no other allegations of him posting or circulating the manipulated video on any platform.
The court considered the submissions made by the Delhi Police, which highlighted Bereddy‘s cooperation with the investigation and the disclosure of the name of another suspect, Pratap Manda. Pratap Manda, associated with the INC Telangana and an agency called “Inclusive Minds,” which involved in creating fabricated videos. As part of the bail conditions, Bereddy required to cooperate with the investigative officer and provide his contact information to the relevant Station House Officer (SHO), ensuring that his phone remains operational. He also prohibited from leaving the country without court permission and from attempting to influence or tamper with any person related to the case or the evidence.
Bereddy initially taken into custody on May 3 for questioning and later arrested by the Intelligence Fusion and Strategic Operations (IFSO) unit of the Delhi Police Special Cell, which handling the investigation.
Read Also: ‘Amit Shah Doctored Video Case’: Arun Reddy Remanded to Judicial Custody Until Tomorrow
Earlier, on April 28, the Delhi Police registered an FIR related to a manipulated video featuring Shah, where his statement during a Lok Sabha poll rally about abolishing religious-based quotas for Muslims in Telangana edited to make it seem like he was advocating for the removal of all reservations. The FIR filed under sections 153, 153A, 465, 469, 171G of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which pertain to provocation with an intent to cause riots, promoting enmity between different groups based on religion, forgery, and making false statements in connection with an election, respectively. Relevant sections of the Information Technology (IT) Act also included.
The Delhi police subsequently included section 120B (criminal conspiracy) of the IPC in its FIR following Bereddy’s initial interrogation.
According to police officers associate with the case,
“Several individuals collaborated, edited Shah’s original video, and circulated the altered clip on social media platforms to propagate “misinformation and incite public disorder,”
The bail granted to the accused in the Amit Shah doctored video case marks a pivotal moment in understanding and delineating the limits of digital content manipulation involving public figures. As the case progresses, it will undoubtedly continue to be a focal point for discussions on digital ethics, legal boundaries, and the protection of public figures against defamatory content.
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
