In a joint response, the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA), the Home Ministry and the Delhi Police rejected the allegation that Fasih Mohammed was abducted by the Indian police personnel for custodial interrogation and his whereabouts were not known.
Appearing for the Centre, Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Gaurav Banerjee made a categorical statement that Mohammed was not in the custody of the Indian police, although a Red Corner notice was pending against him for alleged anti-national activities.
"He is not in our custody. He may or may not be in the custody of the Saudi Arab police", Banerjee told a bench of justices K S Radhakrishnan and J S Khehar.
Responding to pointed questions from the bench on whose custody was he, if not the Indian police, the ASG maintained that the MEA was seized of the issue.
He said that the Indian Ambassador to the Saudi Arabia was in constant touch with the Saudi authorities on the issue and would be holding talks with them and that some concrete results were expected.
The ASG also said that it normally took time to interact with Saudi authorities, but the bench responded by saying, "We need to know where he is. The case is very serious."
Advocate Naushad Ahmad Khan, appearing for the petitioner and wife of Mohammed, Nikhat Parveen, however, argued that Mohammed was in the custody of the Indian police which had started reacting only after the intervention of the apex court.
To this, the bench said that since, according to the Centre, Mohammed was not in Indian custody, it will take up the matter for further hearing on Monday after the government furnishes details of its talks with the Saudi authorities.
