The Karnataka High Court today reserved orders in the petition filed by Twitter's Manish Maheshwari challenging the notice issued to him under Section 41A of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) by the Uttar Pradesh Police in relation to the Ghaziabad assault video..Appearing for the Uttar Pradesh State Police on Friday, Advocate Prasanna Kumar submitted that if Maheshwari is not the Managing Director (MD) of Twitter India, he should state the same before the Court. .Kumar also assured the Court that Maheshwari will not be arrested as he is only a representative of Twitter. "As an MD, he cannot be sent to jail. It is in a representative capacity. That is the law....If he is not the MD, then he should come and tell that he is not the MD.".In response, Justice G Narendar said,"How many times should he tell that he is not the MD? He already answered, on 18th June.".The Court eventually proceeded to reserve its order in the matter and stated that it would be pronounced on July 13..Prasanna also made arguments on the jurisdiction of the Karnataka High Court to hear the matter, asking,"Whether opening an email in Bengaluru office can be a cause of action?"He contended that Section 160 of the CrPC cannot be read in isolation but has to be read conjointly with Section 161. .Senior Advocate CV Nagesh, appearing for Maheshwari, on the other hand, submitted that there was a need to ensure that power under Section 41A is not used to intimidate, threaten and harass people such as the petitioner..During the course of the hearing, Nagesh pointed out that when the Court had passed the interim order, it protected the interests of both the parties, Maheshwari and the UP Police. Further, it was submitted, "I have not asked for quashing of the FIR. I am a third party here. Notice is issued under Section 41A and 160 CrPC to a third party.".Yesterday, Nagesh told the Court that his client did not want to hamper the investigation being carried out by the Uttar Pradesh Police in relation to the Ghaziabad assault video case..[Manish Maheshwari] Let UP Police come to me, I am not interested in hampering investigation: CV Nagesh to Karnataka High Court.Earlier, the High Court took strong exception to the way in which media houses had reported on a previous hearing in the matter.The Court took specific exception to the use of the word "lambasted" by some media outlets after it was informed that certain news reports mentioned that the Court had "lambasted the Uttar Pradesh police" over their insistence on Maheshwari's appearance..On June 24, the High Court had granted interim protection from arrest to Maheshwari in relation to the FIR filed by the Uttar Pradesh Police over the Ghaziabad attack video..[BREAKING] Karnataka High Court grants interim protection to Twitter MD Manish Maheshwari in FIR filed by UP Police.Maheshwari had moved the High Court challenging the notice issued to him under Section 41A CrPC. This was pursuant to an FIR registered against Twitter and others in the backdrop of tweets on a video wherein an elderly Muslim man was asked to shave his beard and was forced to chant "Vande Mataram" and "Jai Shri Ram"..The Uttar Pradesh Police had ruled out any "communal angle" and said that Sufi Abdul Samad, the elderly man, was attacked by six men who were unhappy over the tabeez (amulets) he had sold them.The FIR stated that the accused circulated a video of the incident on their Twitter handles without checking its authenticity, that they gave the video a communal angle, and intended to incite communal hatred between religious communities..Pursuant to the notice, Maheshwari was directed by the UP Police to appear before Loni Border Police Station as part of the investigation into the Ghaziabad video matter.He then moved the Karnataka High Court, which had granted him interim protection.