Also Read - HP High Court Orders Inquiry Into Officials Permitting Prolonged Retention of Earmarked Government Accommodation

The defense further pointed out that the applicant has consistently complied with law enforcement, having already presented himself multiple times before the investigating officers whenever summoned. It was argued that with all relevant digital hardware, including his personal laptop and smartphone, already in police custody, there was no valid reason for custodial detention.

On the other hand, the prosecution strongly opposed the relief, arguing that the sloganeering went beyond peaceful discourse and touched upon sensitive national security concerns. State prosecutors highlighted that forensic analysis of digital equipment reportedly recovered material and literature associated with banned ideologies, arguing that advocacy challenging the nation's integrity must be treated with strict seriousness.

Also Read - Rajasthan High Court Orders Immediate Medical Facilities in Jodhpur Sessions Court Complex After Lawyer's Death

After weighing both sides, the single-judge bench ruled that because the material evidence has already been secured by the police, insisting on custodial interrogation is not warranted at this stage. The court extended interim protection against arrest while ordering the former student to strictly report to the designated police station on scheduled dates and continue cooperating with the probe.

This ruling highlights the fine balance the judiciary maintains between enabling police investigations and protecting individual liberty from premature custodial detention. By prioritizing procedural cooperation over immediate arrest, the court reinforced the principle that pre-trial incarceration should not be used arbitrarily when evidence is already secured.

Also Read - Bombay High Court Grants Interim Protection from Arrest to Former TISS Student