TRP Scam-Materials Show That Partho Dasgupta Manipulated TRP For Particular TV channels Using Office Of CEO Of BARC: ACMM Court-Read Order

"The material available on record shows the involvement of the present accused in the alleged crime. The present applicant played the vital role in the commission of offence. He was CEO of BARC from June, 2013 to November, 2019. The material collected by the Investigating Officer shows that the present accused manipulated TRP for particular TV channels by using his office as CEO of BARC."

The order was passed on January 4 by Additional CMM Sudhir Bhajipale and was made available today. The order states-

"From the case diary and the reply to the bail application, it appears that the investigation is at a crucial stage as far as further investigation. The accused is the most influential person who worked as CEO of BARC and the other persons or accused are yet to be interrogated. In such circumstances, it is the requirement of further investigation to keep the present accused away from the wanted accused and other material witnesses."

Partho Dasgupta was arrested on December 24 2020 and chargesheet has been filed against 13 accused. The bail application argued that co-accused Romil Ramgadiya, who was arrested subsequent to filing of charge­sheet was released on bail and there is no evidence against Dasgupta. The sections of the Indian Penal Code are not applicable as to the role of the present accused is concern. The articles such as phone, laptop are already seized from the accused, the application states.

The bail plea was strongly opposed by the investigation officer and the special public prosecutor in the case as the offences are serious in nature. They contended that if Dasgupta is released on bail he will abscond and witnesses will be hampered.

Addressing the argument of releasing Ramgadiya on bail, the court said, "He has played different role than the present accused in commission of the offence. Considering the said fact, principle of parity is not applicable in case of the present applicant. No doubt, at present the accused is in judicial custody. However, it does not mean that the investigation is completed. At this juncture, release of the present accused/applicant will hamper the further investigation. In such circumstances, as the investigation is in progress, it will not be proper to release the accused on bail. So considering the facts and circumstances, the bail application is rejected."