Prima Facie Remarks Not Addressed Directly To Virat Kohli Or Family (Daughter) – Court While Granting Bail To Man Accused Of Rape Threats Against Couple's Daughter

"If we perused the record and considered the remarks posted and phraseology used in its natural course, it appears that it is made in context of some other posts and may not be directly addressed to the cricketer or his family, even though as social media accounts are inter connected it might have read/received by them," Metropolitan Magistrate Komal Sing Rajput said.

She noted that most of the offences against Ramnagesh Akubathini were bailable offences, and "just because the matter was connected with a respectable Indian Cricket Team member," bail cannot be rejected.

On October 24, India lost a world cup match to Pakistan for the first time. Kohli stood up for Indian cricketer Mohammad Shami, who was trolled because of his poor performance against Pakistan in the T20 World Cup based on his religion.

The prosecution alleged that Akubathini while responding to certain comments online crossed his limits and made some sexually colored remarks against the child of one of the member of Indian Cricket Team. An FIR was registered based on Kohli's manager's complaint.

The Mumbai police then arrested Akubathini from Hyderabad and booked him under Section 354 (A), 506, 500 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and under Sections 67 and 67-B of Information Technology Act, 2000.

Abhijeet Desai, advocate for Akubathini said that he is a State topper and a graduate from the Indian Institute of Technology (IIT), Hyderabad. And a month ago he quit his job with a food delivery Application to prepare for a masters degree in the US.

While denying Akubathini authored the post, Desai argued that the alleged post seems to be in context of responses of various people and it is singly picked up and an offence registered. The post is not directly connected with the cricketer or his family and cannot be read in isolation of other posts, he said.

In its order the court said this was an important aspect. The judge further agreed with Desai's argument about non-applicability of section 67B of the IT Act pertaining to electronic circulation of child pornography.

The judge observed that Akubathini has neither transmitted nor published child pornography.

"The contents of the First Information Report and the whole record show that in response to certain social media post accused allegedly mentioned and posted message that he is in search of photos of a child for assaulting her. He has not either transmitted or published any material showing a child involving in sexually explicit act. Therefore, there is doubt whether of these offences made out or not? At least for the limited purpose of in vie grounds assigned this aspect cannot be ignored."