Bombay High Court Tuesday Aryan Khan’s bail plea postponedActor Shahrukh Khan’s son was arrested on Wednesday in the cruise drug seizure case. Senior advocate and former Attorney General of India Mukul Rohatgi, representing Aryan, argued that no drugs were recovered from him, and no medical examination showed that he had consumed drugs.
The Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) opposed the bail plea, alleging that the 23-year-old was not only a consumer of drugs but was also involved in illegal drug trafficking.
Aryan was seeking bail from the Bombay High Court as both the magistrate and the sessions court had rejected his plea.
Here are the top developments from Aryan Khan’s bail hearing:
The NCB said that Aryan is an influential person and there is a possibility of tampering with evidence or escaping justice if released on bail. It further said that the evidence suggests that Aryan was in contact with people abroad who were part of an international drug network.
The NCB said that the material collected during the investigation primarily revealed that Aryan had played a role in illegal purchase and distribution of contraband procured from Arbaaz Merchant.
The agency also claimed that a woman named Pooja Dadlani, manager of Aryan Khan and Shah Rukh Khan, was tampering with evidence and witnesses in an attempt to derail the investigation.
Rohatgi, appearing for Aryan said, “The applicant is 23 years old and was earlier in California in USA. There was a cruise from Mumbai to Goa and he was invited on the cruise as a guest by a Prateek Gaba. From the applicant There was no recovery and he had nothing. There was no opportunity to arrest my client.”
He further said, “NCB sent officers to nab the customers. Aryan and Arbaaz were arrested. According to NCB, six grams of charas have been recovered from the shoes of the merchant and he is denying it. There is no concern except that he is my friend. There was no medical examination of Khan to show that there was consumption.”
Rohatgi also said that there is no material to show that Aryan financed the illegal smuggling of drugs. “There is no conspiracy and no provocation and I am not in any master-servant relationship. That is the position of all the facts before the court. I am not condoning any consumption or use. These young boys Even if you accept ‘conscious possession’ of 6 grams, the idea is the law (NDPS Act) has no antecedents as a victim for young boys who are hard-line offenders,” he said. argued.
Earlier, Aryan’s advocates submitted an additional note to the HC, stating that he had nothing to do with the allegations and counter-allegations being circulated among the zonal directors of the NCB. Sameer Wankhede and some political personalities. “The zonal director of the NCB, in his affidavit, said that it (the allegation) is due to enmity with a political personality (Nawab Malik), whose son-in-law was arrested. What is being said today is going to hit me back in a way. Please keep me out of that controversy. I (Aryan Khan) have no complaint,” Rohatgi told the court.
Rohatgi also argued that none of the WhatsApp chats recovered from the phone are related to the cruise party. “According to me there is no consumption or possession and even if conscious possession is concerned, the punishment is for one year. Aryan is not charged under Section 27A of the NDPS Act as it was just an incident. However, he has accused Aryan of conspiracy under Section 29. This is a normal, ambiguous situation. His charge of conspiracy is to cover Section 27A and, once invoked, bail under Section 37 of the NDPS Act. There is a moratorium on giving. There is no previous punishment in this case,” he said.
Rohatgi also cited previous judgments of the Supreme Court and HC to support his case. he cited a Bombay High Court order From August this year, in which there was talk of “opportunities for reforms” for young persons accused in NDPS cases. they even handed over one article in indian express Referring to the Ministry of Social Justice’s remarks on drug consumption reforms.
After senior advocate Amit Desai argued for another applicant and said that he would take half an hour more time to argue, the court adjourned the hearing on bail applications till Wednesday afternoon due to paucity of time. .
(with ENS input)
.