The single bench of Justice G Narender said the police can examine Maheshwari through virtual mode.
“If the police desire to examine the petitioner (Manish Maheshwari), they may do so through virtual mode,” the court said.
“If the matter requires consideration, we list it on June 29.In the meanwhile restraining the respondents from initiating any coercive action against the petitioner,” the court maintained.
“It is case of petitioner that he has replied to notice under section 160 of CrPC to join through virtual mode.The respondent (Ghaziabad police) taking objection to the request has turned around and issued notice under section 41(A) virtually putting him in shoes of accused,” it observed.
Appearing on behalf of Maheshwari, advocate C V Nagesh said someone had posted a video on the Twitter platform alleging that a Muslim was forced to chant ‘Jai Sri Ram’ and ‘Vande Mataram’.
When he refused, his beard was cut.
Subsequently a notice under section 161 of the CrPC was issued to Maheshwari by email and responding to it, he said he would be ready to appear virtually.
Soon the police issued a notice under section 41(A) asking him to appear in person within 24 hours to travel from Bengaluru to Ghaziabad, which was not possible for Maheshwhari, Nagesh told the court.
The court maintained that the petitioner is an employee of Twitter Communication India Private Limited handling marketing and sales and not a member of board of directors to be responsible for uploading of the alleged video based on which the FIR was registered.