DRDO espionage case: Scientist files bail plea, claims info ‘shared with Pak woman’ was in public domain

Kurulkar’s lawyer Rhishikesh Ganu said the bail application describes in detail how the information, which according to (ATS), is “confidential” and was shared with a Pakistani woman, was available in public domain.

According to the ATS, the PIO who identified herself as ‘Zara Dasgupta’ came in contact with Kurulkar through WhatsApp, telling him that she was a software engineer based in the UK.

She allegedly lured Kurulkar by sending several obscene messages, voice notes and video calls. An investigation revealed that Kurulkar and Zara had multiple conversations between June 10, 2022, and February 24, 2023. ATS has named Zara as a co-accused in the case.

The ATS has alleged that Zara wanted to procure confidential information from Kurulkar about various DRDO and defence projects in India. On the other hand, Kurulkar got “attracted” to her and allegedly misused his position to share confidential information with her through “WhatsApp messages, voice and video calls”, the ATS stated.

Advocate Ganu said the prosecution is relying on electronic evidence, which is data retrieved from cell phone and other devices seized from the accused. “Entire data and electronic devices are in possession of ATS. So it cannot be tampered with (by Kurulkar). The devices were seized by the DRDO on February 24, 2023, and further taken over by the ATS for probe. The ATS has filed the chargesheet in this case. So we have applied for bail,” the lawyer argued.

Prosecution lawyer Vijay Fargade put forth his arguments against Kurulkar’s bail plea.

Special judge V R Kachare has kept the matter for hearing on August 9.

While appearing before the court through video conferencing, Kurulkar said he was investigated by the ATS daily between April 19 and April 24, but the details of this “episode” are not attached in the chargesheet. To this, the court asked Kurulkar to submit a written application through his lawyer.

Kurulkar is currently under judicial custody in Yerwada jail.

Meanwhile, ATS has attached with the chargesheet (comprising six volumes and 1,835 pages) the details of the WhatsApp chats between the scientist and Zara, which were retrieved from his cell phone.

The chargesheet specifically mentions a chat dated October 28, 2022, as per which Kurulkar told Zara that he would show her highly confidential report on ‘Bramhos’ missile despite knowing it was highly confidential and cannot be shared over WhatsApp and email.

As stated in the chargesheet, along with Brahmos, Kurulkar and Zara had WhatsApp chats on “Agni 6, Rustom (a medium altitude long-endurance unmanned air vehicle), Surface to Air Missiles (SAM), Unmanned Combat Air Vehicles (UCAV), Drone projects” of DRDO. It also includes chats on “Quadcopter, DRDO duty chart, Meteor missile, Rafael, Akash and Astra missile” and refers to a private Indian defence company executive who is a DRDO vendor and makes “robotic equipment” for Indian forces.

The ATS has submitted “confidential” details against Kurulkar in this case to the court in a sealed envelope. Advocate Ganu has filed an application that copies of these “confidential” documents be given to him for preparing his defence. The ATS has not yet filed its say about it.

Arguments on application for Kurulkar’s voice layer test

Meanwhile, advocate Ganu made arguments against the application filed by ATS seeking permission from the court to conduct Kurulkar’s polygraph and “voice layer and psychological analysis” tests.

Ganu told the court that the ATS submitted the application in June and later in July the chargesheet in this case was also filed.

Prosecution lawyer Fargade argued that the probe is not over yet and that full data in the cell phone of the accused was not retrieved. “We were able to retrieve some data. Application is filed for sending the cell phone to Gujarat Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) for retrieving the remaining data for further investigation.”

During previous hearings, Kurulkar denied consent for conducting these tests claiming it is in violation of his fundamental rights enshrined under Articles 20 and 21 of the Constitution.

The ATS argued that the consent of the accused was not essential for “voice layer and psychological analysis” test, so it should be allowed. The court has not passed an order in this matter.