A Delhi court on Saturday rejected the anticipatory bail plea of Vishal Jha, an accused person in the case related to the “Bulli Bai” app, which was used to put more than 100 Muslim women on “online auction”, Bar and Bench reported.

Additional Sessions Judge Dharmender Rana said that the allegations in the matter were “a direct onslaught upon the dignity and modesty of the woman of a particular community”.

The “Bulli Bai” app was the second attempt in recent months to target Muslim women. In July, an app called “Sulli Deals” had posted hundreds of images of Muslim women, taken without permission from their social media handles and described them as “deals of the day”. The “Bulli Bai” app emerged on January 1.

Both “Bulli” and “Sulli” are derogatory terms used to refer to Muslim women.

Apart from Jha, four other persons – Neeraj Bishnoi, Mayank Rawat , Shweta Singh and Neeraj Singh have been arrested in the case. Bishnoi, allegedly the main conspirator was arrested by the Delhi Police, while the others are in custody of the Mumbai Police.

Cases have filed against the accused persons in both the cities. A Mumbai court has already denied bail to Jha, Singh and Rawat, while a Delhi court has refused to grant the relief to Bishnoi.

At a hearing of Jha’s anticipatory bail plea on Friday, judge Rana had asked the deputy commissioner of Delhi Police to state the difference between the first information reports registered against the accused persons in the national Capital and Mumbai, Bar and Bench reported.

On Saturday, the deputy commissioner told the court that the Delhi Police had registered the FIR before the Mumbai Police. In his plea, Jha, in an apparent reference to Bishnoi, had contended that someone else had created the “Bulli Bai” app, and that person has already been arrested.

However, the judge observed that Bishnoi had created the “scandalous” app “in cahoots” with Jha and the other co-accused. He held that further custodial interrogation of the accused persons was required in the matter.

“The conduct of the accused persons in the instant case is against the ever cherished Constitutional ethos of secularism and fraternity ensuring the dignity of any individual and modesty of a woman,” the judge noted, according to Bar and Bench.