Sonakshi Sinha’s obscene morphed photos case: Accused released due to legal lapses

November 15, 2026

Mumbai: A court has ordered the release of the accused arrested in connection with the viral social media post of obscene morphed photos and videos of Bollywood actress Sonakshi Sinha. The court issued this ruling, terming the police’s arrest process as illegal. A case was registered at Mumbai’s Bandra police station on November 13, 2026, based on Sonakshi’s complaint. The actress alleged that a man from Delhi had shared her morphed photos on social media.

Police arrested the accused in Delhi on Saturday and produced him before a Mumbai magistrate’s court. However, during the hearing, the court ordered his release, citing lack of legal procedures in the arrest process.

Accused arrested for making obscene photos of Sonakshi

Aryan Deepak Jain, the accused in the case, was produced before a magistrate in the Bandra court on Saturday. He was arrested on November 14, 2026, at around 10:11 am in connection with a case related to the Jagatpuri police station in Shahdara, Delhi. He was later brought to Mumbai, where the court questioned the procedure used to arrest him.

During the hearing, the Bandra police sought three days of police custody for the accused. They stated that they needed to determine the medium or electronic device used to create the alleged obscene images of the actress. Furthermore, questioning the accused was considered necessary for further investigation.

Court raises questions about lapses in the arrest process

The court observed that the accused was not produced before the local magistrate’s court after being arrested in Delhi. Instead, the police brought him directly from Delhi to Mumbai and presented him before the Bandra court.

The magistrate remarked that it appeared that the police transported the accused to Mumbai without following the mandatory legal procedure of presenting him before the court in the jurisdiction of his arrest. The court also stated that the investigating agency failed to provide any satisfactory reason on record as to why the accused was not produced before the local court in Delhi.

Defense opposes demand for police custody

Lawyers Aman Shahi, Prashant Trivedi, and Aditya Jain, representing the accused, strongly opposed the police’s demand for custody. They argued that the accused was not given the necessary notice before the arrest, nor was he informed of the grounds for arrest.

The lawyers also alleged that the accused was transported out of Delhi by flight in utmost secrecy. They stated that, according to the law, the accused should have been produced before the local magistrate court in Delhi, but this was not done.

The defense alleged that the police acted hastily due to the influence of the complainant. The accused pleaded innocence, claiming he had committed no crime. Furthermore, the defense claimed that prima facie the legal sections imposed in the case were not applicable to him.

Necessary legal procedures were not followed before the arrest

Regarding the issue of providing notice before arrest, the court stated that the offenses charged against the accused carry a maximum sentence of seven years. In such cases, police officers are required to follow the rules prescribed under Section 35(1)(b) of the Indian Civil Service Code (BNSS). This includes recording the reasons for the arrest.

The court found that the case records did not clearly demonstrate that the investigating officer had satisfactorily complied with these mandatory legal requirements for arrest.

The court clarified that a person cannot be arrested and detained merely on the grounds of need for further investigation, especially when the necessary legal procedures related to the arrest were not followed. On this basis, the court held the accused’s arrest illegal and ordered his release.