The Bombay High Court on Thursday asked Mumbai Police to justify why the custody of actress Gehana Vasisth would be required in the first information report (FIR) relating to porn film case, particularly since she had been kept in custody in an earlier FIR in connection with the same case..The Court raised this query while hearing the anticipatory bail application moved by Vasisth in the third FIR filed against her in the porn film case. Businessman Raj Kundra is also an accused in another FIR in the porn film case..Advocate Abhishek Yende appearing for Vasisth argued that the police already had seized all material that was required for investigation. She had been in custody for more than 4 months, it was pointed out.“While she was in judicial custody a second FIR was registered and investigated. After her release, a third FIR was registered and it is in this case that the police is seeking her custody,” Yende argued..Justice Sandeep Shinde asked the Public Prosecutor (PP) Prajakta Shinde to explain why Vasisth should be arrested again when she had already been in custody for over 4 months for offences which were similar to the present FIR.“In the second FIR, you scrutinized the applicant's involvement when she was in custody, and yet you could not find out who the owner of the OTT channel was to whom the video was sold to. You have to tell the Court what material was seized in February 2021 FIR and what is the new material that you are seeking now, considering that you are seeking custody of a person here," Justice Shinde said..Vasisth’s lawyer pointed out that as per the FIR, the informant had been coerced to act in obscene videos by two other directors apart from Gehana.“The alleged incident of exploitation took place in February and then she goes for shooting in March; how can a person indulge in similar acts within a month?" asked Justice Shinde..It was Vasisth’s contention that the exercise of filing FIRs was only a pressure tactic by the police to pressurize her to give out names of richer people.“Police is hand in gloves, they want to pressurize so that I (Gehana) gives out names of some big fish and then be released. Even if I am given anticipatory bail here, they will register a fourth FIR, and then arrest me," her lawyer submitted on her behalf..Opposing the application, the public prosecutor informed the Court that the allegation against Vasisth was of forcing women like the informant to shoot obscene videos under the false pretense that the video will not be released..After she informed the Court that her instructing officer had no information on the investigation conducted in the earlier FIRs, the Court posted the matter for arguments on August 32, 2021. Yende sought protection from arrest for Vasisth to which the Court orally stated that since the officer was present in Court, he will ensure no coercive action is taken till next date.