Republic TV And Arnab Goswami's Plea Against Mumbai Police's FIR In TRP Scam: Live Updates From Bombay High Court

Mundargi - In IPC there is no vicarious liability. Because 34 is common intention. There is not even a whisper so far as Pet No. 2 (Arnab) is concerned.

It is kept open-ended deliberately.

J Shinde - Please address us on this.

Please don't assume we have formed our opinion. We believe that with dialogue there will be quality assistance.

Mundargi - I must clarify about the database. In each house how many channels

J Shinde- small interruption, the petition is set for quashing. Whatever limitations are there in law for quashing, to what extent the court can exercise the jurisdiction?

Mundargi- The names of those persons who were paid to watch which channel is available with the first informant in June 2020 itself.

Mundargi while reading the statement. There is very specific information on another channel. 

Continues reading the statement. 

Mungargi- 30,000 bar-o-meters in India, 6% installed in Maharashtra. They have taken statements for just 8 bar-o-meters

J Pitale- the allegation seems to be there is rampant bribing.

Justice Shinde -We are not going names, just the facts of the case objectivity and decision

Mundargi - There are malafides right from saying there is a TRP Scam

Mundargi reads the statement of Deputy General Manager of Hansa Research Group.

"I will point out how without naming people...

Mundargi mentions the offences are section 406, 409 (criminal breach of trust) and 420 (cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property) 465, 468 (forgery), 201, 204 (disappearance or destruction of evidence), 212 (harbouring offender) and 120B (conspiracy) of IPC.