A Delhi Court is hearing the bail plea moved by Supreme Court advocate Ashwini Upadhyay. He was arrested and remanded to judicial custody by a Delhi court late on Tuesday evening. Upadhyay was booked in connection with the anti-muslim sloganeering incident at Jantar Mantar..Anti-muslim slogans: Delhi Court sends four including Ashwini Upadhyay to 2 day judicial custody, two others remanded to one day police custody.Live updates from the bail hearing today feature here..Senior Advocates Vikas Singh, Sidharth Luthra and Praddep Rai appear for Ashwini Upadhyay..Court says apart from Upadhyay, matter pertaining to the rest of the accused would be heard by the Court concerned on August 13..Senior Advocate Vikash Singh to begin arguments on behalf of Upadhyay..Advocate Avadh Kaushik appearing for another accused person, seeks hearing today..Singh: We are all appearing not only because respected advocate, this kind of arrest can't be permitted... These videos which became viral are .. it is clear form the video that it is at 5pm..Singh: Police can’t discriminately arrest any body when there is no plausible suspicion also. Suppose allegation was that it was in his presence I wouldn’t have defended him or he was the organiser..Singh: To make out a case of Section 153A (promoting enmity) you have to say that at my instance the slogan happened or I was there. Timing of allegation has to be seen. Why should we wait till midnight to register a case?.Luthra: Distance was substantial.. Peculiar facts of Upadhyay that why both Mr Singh and I are here. His is a case of distinct facts. We may be a part of assembly but are not responsible for the fracas that takes place after we have left..Luthra: People are social beings...Public prosecutor: We have to see gravity of offence. Date. Pandemic time going. At this time you are gathering so many people. Celebration time. You see the area. Sensitivity of the area. Parliament Session was going on. Having this gathering at this sensitive..PP: Should have been after August 15 or pandemic is over..Court to PP: We are concerned with the main section 153A Have you asked the IO whether his presence was there. Was he present on spot when slogans were made?.PP: It was an unlawful assembly.. All these offences were committed. Section 149 involved. Even if in his presence, somebody has given hate speech, 149 is invoked. Prima facie I have to show whether accused present if hate speech was made on behalf of the accused..PP: He didn’t bother to bring this to the police agencies. No bona fide there also...PP: His (Upadhyay) version is that he had left. But it's a matter of investigation. No evidence to that affect. It is a nascent stage, we have to see the nexus. Aiding hai ki nahi hai..His insensitivity is seen..Sr Adv Vikas Singh now rebutting PP's submissions.Sr Advocate Vikas Singh: I will be last person to defend someone making such a hate speech. The country will get completely divided if we allow such speeches..Singh: What is the proof of involvement? They are themselves saying that the video is pending analysis... Such a person making hate speech in the video should be arrested. There is no question. I am again saying I will be the last person to defend them..Singh: We feel the arrest is against the rule of law. If it is allowed, then anyone can be arrested. Even I can be picked up but this is not the law..Sr Adv Gopal Sankaranarayanan now appears for Ashwini Upadhyay: The actual piece of evidence is publicly available. Ashwini Upadhyay is saying on record that "I had nothing to do with the event and I believe prosecution should be initiated against those person.".Gopal Sankaranarayanan: PP is saying no evidence. But we will find out this magnificent conspiracy. This individual wasn’t present. No reason has been given why custody has to be continued..Sankaranarayanan: Videos are there, individuals are available. All of us know Ashwini personally and that's why we are all here. Event took place after him.. If I start making communal slogans would I be responsible.. Would the PP be responsible?.Sankaranarayanan: Mere presence, even if such a presence is admitted, will not be sufficient.. He wasn’t there. It is for the prosecution to show he was present..Orders reserved, to be pronounced at 4PM. .Court to pass orders..Advocate Ashwani Dubey: He is a person who filed 106 PILs in public interest. Such is the bona fide of the man.