During the hearing before A M Vibhute, JMFC the prosecution Adv Rajashree Virkud argued that investigators have recovered a year-old mobile phone from Siya Goyal’s residence. According to the prosecution, deleted data from the accused’s current phone has also been recovered, but several chats allegedly contain code words and nicknames, requiring further investigation and custodial interrogation.
Public Prosecutor Adv Vipul Dushing told the court that police have placed five grounds on record while seeking an extension of custody. The prosecution maintained that deciphering the alleged coded conversations and confronting the accused with the recovered digital evidence would aid the investigation.
Opposing the plea, the defence argued that the police are conducting a “fishing inquiry” and are seeking custody in the hope of finding fresh material. The defence contended that after 12 days of custody, investigators cannot seek further remand without specific and substantial grounds.
The defence also questioned the prosecution’s reliance on alleged code names and nicknames used in chats, arguing that investigators cannot expect the accused to explain conversations in a manner that amounts to self-incrimination, citing protections available under Article 20 of the Constitution.