MUMBAI: There is “direct involvement” of Partho Dasgupta, former BARC (Broadcast Audience Research Council) chief executive officer, in the TRP manipulation scam, said special public prosecutor Shishir Hiray on Tuesday while opposing Dasgupta’s bail plea before the Bombay high court bench of Justice P D Naik.
The court concluded the hearing. Dasgupta’s counsel Aabad Ponda submitted that it “would be a travesty of justice” if the 55-year-old, incarcerated in Taloja jail in Navi Mumbai since his arrest last December, is denied bail. Ponda cited Dasgupta’s health and said once the chargesheet is filed, which it has been in the case, there is no need for his continued custody.
On the arguments by the police of “further investigations” pending and the fear that he would tamper with the witnesses and evidence as an “influential person,” Ponda said further investigations can continue indefinitely, and it cannot mean Dasgupta is forever denied liberty. Ponda also said there was not a single complaint from any advertiser.
Hiray cited a witness statement to argue an ex-employee of BARC had informed a magistrate that she had “noticed” Dasgupta was involved in the scam so that a “channel could make profits from advertisements.” He cited a legal notice by Times Now against BARC to back his opposition to bail.
Hiray cited the purported WhatsApp chats between Dasgupta and Republic TV’s Arnab Goswami, where issues of national security were also discussed, to “show the thick relations between the two”.
He said “at one point in (the) chats, Arnab Goswami even said that Dasgupa was his alter ego.” The prosecutor referred to a‘recovery panchanama’ (wit ness document) of December 2020, which he said mentioned money being transferred by Goswami, which was “unnecessary” and could only be a “form of gratification.”
Dasgupta’s counsel Ponda objected to any reliance on such historical documents, saying they were “inadmissible.” Referring to the alleged chats between Dasgupta and Goswami, Ponda said, “They can’t be considered as evidence without any corroboration.” When the judge asked about chats allegedly related to the Pulwama attack, Ponda submitted that this had nothing to do with the FIR.
“That statement is allegedly made by a person who has been protected by a statement of Mumbai police regarding no coercive action before a division bench.”