Bombay HC reserves orders on Partho Dasgupta’s bail plea

Starts 3rd October

Vanita Keswani

Madison Media Sigma

Poulomi Roy

Joy Personal Care

Hema Malik

IPG Mediabrands

Anita Kotwani

Dentsu Media

Archana Aggarwal

Ex-Airtel

Anjali Madan

Mondelez India

Anupriya Acharya

Publicis Groupe

Suhasini Haidar

The Hindu

Sheran Mehra

Tata Digital

Rathi Gangappa

Starcom India

Mayanti Langer Binny

Sports Prensented

Swati Rathi

Godrej Appliances

Bombay HC reserves orders on Partho Dasgupta’s bail plea

Partho is in custody since December 2020

Partho Dasgupta’s

NEW DELHI: After two consecutive days of both sides presenting their arguments, the Bombay high court has reserved its orders on former BARC CEO Partho Dasgupta’s bail plea in the TRP manipulation case. Dasgupta was arrested in December and is presently being held in Taloja jail. He has been termed as the alleged ‘mastermind’ behind the whole scam. 

Opposing the bail plea, special public prosecutor Shishir Hiray noted that while BARC COO Romil Ramgarhia was in charge of the finances, Dasgupta held a more important position as the CEO and MD of the company. “By the virtue of his position, Dasgupta needs clearance from the Central ministry.” 

He also pointed out that the WhatsApp chats between Dasgupta and Arnab Goswami of Republic Network (ARG Media Outlier) indicate their close relationship.

“There are voluminous chats which have to be investigated. These are influential people, they can tamper with evidence and that need not be mentioned here but I am pointing out he is one who is the kingpin and the one who holds considerable power. It is visible from their chats,” he argued. 

However, Dasgupta’s counsel Aabad Ponda highlighted that the bail hearing was not the place to pass a verdict on Dasgupta's guilt or innocence. He pointed out that MD and CEO are two different posts and Dasgupta was holding the latter. “Firstly I am not the MD and then to make me liable for the managing. Nobody talks of Hansa. The people were paid Rs 200 and not crores as he claims,” he presented on behalf of the ex-chief of BARC. 

Ponda also reiterated his previous point that not a single advertiser “who should have been affected by the Rs 32,000 crore scam” has come forward to complain or stated that they have overpaid the channels. 

After hearing the submissions, the court reserved its orders in the matter.