A major development has emerged in the case involving the alleged circulation of morphed photographs of Bollywood actress Sonakshi Sinha on social media. A Mumbai court has ordered the release of Aryan Deepak Jain, the man arrested in connection with the case, after finding serious procedural lapses in his arrest.
The Bandra magistrate court observed that the police had failed to follow the required legal procedure before bringing the accused from Delhi to Mumbai. The court consequently rejected the police's request for custody and directed that Jain be released.
The case was registered at Mumbai's Bandra police station following a complaint by Sonakshi Sinha. The actress had alleged that a Delhi-based individual circulated digitally altered photographs of her on social media.
Who Is the Accused in Sonakshi Sinha's Morphed Photos Case?
The accused has been identified as Aryan Deepak Jain. According to reports, Mumbai police arrested him at approximately 10:11 AM on November 14, 2026, from the Jagatpuri Police Station area in Delhi's Shahdara district.
Following his arrest, Jain was brought to Mumbai and produced before a magistrate at the Bandra court. The police sought three days of custody to investigate the alleged creation and circulation of the morphed photographs.
Investigators wanted to identify the electronic device or medium allegedly used to create the altered images. They also sought further time to examine the circumstances surrounding their circulation on social media.
However, the court did not accept the police's custody request and ordered the accused's release after examining the circumstances of his arrest.
Why Did the Mumbai Court Release the Accused?
The central issue before the court was whether the police had followed the mandatory legal procedure while arresting Jain in Delhi and bringing him to Mumbai.
The magistrate observed that the accused had not been produced before the nearest magistrate in Delhi before being taken outside the city's jurisdiction. Instead, the police had brought him directly to the Bandra court.
The court reportedly found that the investigating agency had not provided a satisfactory explanation for failing to follow this procedure.
The defence lawyers, Aman Shahi, Prashant Trivedi and Aditya Jain, opposed the police's request for custody. They argued that the police had neither served the required notice nor properly communicated the grounds of arrest to their client.
The defence also submitted that Jain had been taken from Delhi to Mumbai by flight without being presented before a local magistrate. They questioned the manner in which the arrest had been carried out and argued that the mandatory legal safeguards had not been followed.
The accused denied the allegations against him. His lawyers also challenged the applicability of the legal provisions invoked in the case.
Court Highlights BNSS Section 35 Safeguards
Another important aspect of the hearing involved the safeguards provided under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS).
The magistrate noted that the offences in question carried a maximum punishment of up to seven years of imprisonment. In such cases, police officers are required to comply with the relevant safeguards under Section 35(1)(b) of the BNSS.
These safeguards include recording reasons that establish why an arrest is necessary. The court observed that the available records did not demonstrate satisfactory compliance with these requirements.
The magistrate also clarified that the need for further investigation cannot, by itself, become sufficient justification for arresting or detaining an individual without following the prescribed legal procedure.
On this basis, the court rejected the police's request for three days of custody and ordered Jain's release.
What Happens Next in Sonakshi Sinha's Case?
The court's order concerns the legality of the arrest and does not amount to a final decision on the allegations involving the morphed photographs.
The complaint registered at Bandra police station remains a separate matter from the question of whether the arrest was conducted lawfully. The release of the accused does not establish that the allegations are false or bring the investigation to a conclusion.
The police investigation may continue in accordance with the applicable legal procedures. Investigators will need to examine the alleged circulation of the altered images and establish the facts through appropriate evidence.
The case also highlights the importance of following due process in cybercrime investigations, particularly when arrests are made across state boundaries.
For now, the key development is the Mumbai court's decision to release Aryan Deepak Jain after identifying procedural shortcomings in his arrest. The investigation into Sonakshi Sinha's complaint remains a separate legal issue.
Click here for the latest news from Bollywood, Hollywood, South Film Industry, Bhojpuri and TV world… Click here to join the Facebook Page, Twitter Page, YouTube page, and Instagram of Bollywood Mascot!
Leave a Comment