Thread: As is the case with most polarised and emotionally charged topics, many irrelevant arguments being made by both sides. Either there was something illegal or there wasn't and the state is harassing an innocent person. Not everything that is distasteful is illegal (1/n)

So merely pointing to activity that is unacceptable to build emotion is not sufficient for the public to seek *criminal* proceedings. That requires a specific law to have been broken, and specific evidence for the same. The police will have to make that case in court. (2/n)

Public commentary can of course *politically* oppose such mobilisation, criticise such speech etc. but legal proceedings have a different requirement. Similarly IF a law HAS been broken, then arguments like "she is 21",,,, (3/n)

..."Is Indian state so weak that it is afraid of an activist" , "this will hurt India's image/ soft power" etc. are irrelevant and again emotional arguments. The only relevant arguments are legal ones, and those are a matter for the court (4/4)