Adil Durrani claimed that Rakhi Sawant showed two of her private videos with runtimes of 29 minutes and 25 seconds and 23 minutes and 22 seconds on national television.
Rakhi Sawant's anticipatory bail plea has been rejected by a Dindoshi sessions court in the case filed by her ex-husband, Adil Khan Durrani. He accused her of circulating his private videos involving sexually explicit material featuring him on a TV show and sharing links to the videos in WhatsApp groups.
The allegations against Sawant state that during a televised show on August 25, she exhibited her mobile phone containing explicit content. Durrani claimed that she displayed two videos with runtimes of 29 minutes and 25 seconds and 23 minutes and 22 seconds. Subsequently, on October 18, Durrani filed a case against her.
In her plea for anticipatory bail, Rakhi Sawant argued that her ex-husband's credibility is questionable due to multiple cases registered against him. She maintained that although the video was displayed on TV, the actual contents were not visible, challenging any infringement of the law as outlined in the Information Technology Act. Sawant's plea asserted that if she were to be booked, her ex-husband, Durrani, should also be considered an accused, as he was responsible for recording the videos.
In response, the prosecution countered these claims by highlighting that Sawant not only showcased her phone with objectionable content on the TV show but also shared the videos and their links on various WhatsApp groups. The prosecution argued that Sawant has a pattern of engaging in the transmission of sexually explicit material, citing a prior offense filed against her by another actress. They pointed out that her anticipatory bail in that case had already been denied, although Sawant's lawyer clarified that she was granted pre-arrest bail by the Bombay High Court in that instance.
After considering arguments from both parties and reviewing the case details, the court stated, "If the allegations and the material allegedly transmitted or published by the applicant is concerned, I have no hesitation to hold that the material is not only obscene but it is sexually explicit as well." Referring to a prior offense as a background, the court acknowledged Sawant's claim of cooperation with the investigation process. However, it noted the objection raised by the investigation officer, emphasizing the need to seize the devices used for transmitting and storing the disputed material, which are currently in Sawant's possession, as highlighted by the court.
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
 "Rakhi Sawant-Adil Durrani")
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
)
)
)
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}