Clear Case Of Conspiracy; Will Find Out Ultimately Connections Between Accused : NCB Opposes Bail To Aryan Khan & Others

The Special NDPS Court in Mumbai has reserved judgment on the bail pleas filed by Aryan Khan, Arbaaz Merchant and Munmun Dhamecha, who were arrested by the Narcotics Control Bureau in connection with the cruise ship drug case on October 3. Arguments for all three applicants concluded yesterday. Read here. Special Judge VV Patil today, after hearing Additional Solicitor General Anil Singh appearing for NCB, said that he will pronounce order on October 20. During the hearing, the Judge had indicated that he will go through Khan's allegedly incriminatory WhatsApp chats. The NCB has alleged that Khan is involved in the illicit "procurement and distribution" of contraband, and further he was in touch with some persons abroad who appear to be a part of an International Drug Network for illicit procurement. Senior Advocate Amit Desai appearing for Aryan Khan denied the allegations as baseless, and highlighted that there has been no recovery from Khan. "If he did not have cash, he had no plans to purchase. If he had no substance, he wasn't going to sell or consume," Desai submitted. Significantly, NCB has allegedly recovered six grams of charas from Arbaz Merchant and five grams from Munmun Dhamecha. However, their counsels argued that they were mere invitees to the party and have no involvement in the alleged illicit drug trade. It was also said that the alleged recoveries were of 'small quantity', not commercial. All three, Aryan, Arbaz and Munmun were booked under sections 8(c) read with 20b (purchase), 27 (consumption), 28 (attempt to commit offence), 29 (abetment/ conspiracy) and 35 (presumption of culpable mental state) of the NDPS Act. They approached the special court after a magistrate's court rejected his bail application on the grounds that it was not maintainable. NCB's Stand Aryan Khan a regular consumer, was in conscious possession of drugs It is NCB's case that though no recovery was made from Aryan Khan's person, he was in "conscious possession" of the contraband, as he is connected with Arbaz (from whom 6 gms charas was recovered) and Aachit (from whom 2.6 gms of ganja was recovered). The agency relied on the case of Showik Chakraborty v. Union of India, where bail was denied in a case of alleged procurement of drugs, despite no recovery being made from Showik's person. The Bombay High Court had noted that therein that Showik was connected with one Anuj Keshwani, from whom commercial quantity of contraband was recovered. Therefore, Showik appears to be an "important link" in the chain of drug dealers and the rigour of Section 37 with respect to the grant of bail will apply. "'Innocent until proven guilty' doesn't apply in the cases of NDPS offences. In the NDPS Act, the presumption is of culpable a mental state, and it is for the accused to prove that he was not in possession during trial," ASG Singh said. However, Senior Advocate Desai argued that Showik's case has to be distinguished from an end consumer's case because Showik didn't consume but dealt in drugs. He also relied on the case of Union of India v. Nawaz Khan, to argue that merely because there is no recovery, as assuming the applicant's case, the rigours of 37 of the NDPS Act for bail will still apply. The ASG further argued that in the accused' WhatsApp chat there is a specific reference to bulk quantity, and that Khan is not a first-time consumer. "The evidence placed on record shows he is a regular consumer of contraband since last few years," the ASG said. Clear case of conspiracy, rigours on grant of bail applicable The ASG said that since there is a charge of conspiracy, rigours on grant of bail under Section 37 of the NDPS Act are applicable in this case. "We will ultimately find out how they all connected to each other and establish a case of conspiracy. This isn't a case of bail at this stage. It can be considered at an appropriate stage," he submitted. NCB has also claimed that Aachit Kumar, who was arrested based on the statement made by Aryan Khan, has been arrested with 2.6 gms of Ganja. Thus, the culpable mental state u/s 35 of the Act of this Applicant is clearly established. However, Senior Advocate Desai contended that presumption of guilt under section 35 applies during trial and not during investigation. Quantity of recovery immaterial in case of conspiracy ASG Singh has also opposed the applicants' reliance on quantity of recovery and said, "If the entire scheme of the act is seen, there are provisions under the Act which have nothing to do with quantity but stringent punishment is prescribed." SPP Advait Sethna said that in the Arman Kohli case, bail was rejected even though 1.35 gms of cocaine, i.e., small quantity was recovered. On the argument that the maximum punishment for offences alleged against Aryan Khan is one year, the ASG said, "if a connection is established...

Clear Case Of Conspiracy; Will Find Out Ultimately Connections Between Accused : NCB Opposes Bail To Aryan Khan & Others

Sharmeen Hakim

Tags