Judge Colllin Lawrence Sequerah said Haziq would remain in police custody until Saturday.

However, he varied the detention period of five others from six days to four.

On Monday, a magistrate had allowed the police to remand them for six days for investigation under the Penal Code for allegedly performing sexual intercourse against the order of nature and circulating obscene videos.

The six were also probed under the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998 for the improper use of communication network facilities such as for distribution of pornographic material.

Five of them, including Haziq, filed a revision under the Criminal Procedure Code saying remand procedures were not followed and the six-day duration was too long.

The sixth individual was represented in court today by lawyer A Ashok, who said any court decision would also affect his client.

Sequerah in his oral judgment said the magistrate had gone through the investigation diary which is now accessible as it is must be transmitted to the court’s online system.

However, lawyer Ramesh Sivakumar, who is leading the legal team representing Haziq and the four others, said the magistrate could not have known whether there was reasonable suspicion for the police to arrest the suspects as she had not been seen reading the investigation diary.

He added that the police must produce the diary to show the magistrate the status of their investigation over the last 24 hours before the suspects are presented for further detention orders.

“The magistrate did not consider individually the offences the suspects were being investigated for but rather collectively,” he said.

He also said only two individuals could be involved in the offence of performing carnal intercourse against the order of nature, not six.

The other lawyers representing the five are R Sivahnanthan and Vince Tan.

Deputy public prosecutor Mohd Radzi Abdul Razak urged the court to dismiss the revision application, saying the magistrate had followed all procedures laid down under Sections 117 and 119 of the Criminal Procedure Code.