Top
Begin typing your search above and press return to search.
Top Stories

Aryan Khan's International Linkages Indicate Towards Illegal Drug Procurement : NCB Alleges In Reply To Bail

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK
13 Oct 2021 9:26 AM GMT
Aryan Khans WhatsApp Chats For Drugs, Wrong Role Model for Youngsters, NCBs Arguments Before Court
x

The Narcotics Control Bureau has accused Aryan Khan of being involved in the illicit "procurement and distribution" of contraband, prohibited under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.

It has also alleged that Khan was in touch with some persons abroad who appear to be a part of an International Drug Network for illicit procurement and investigation thereof is underway.

"During initial investigation, some International linkages pertinent to this Applicant (Aryan) have been unearthed which is prima facie indicating towards illicit drug procurement. The investigation requires sufficient time to property investigate the said linkages so as to approach the concerned foreign agency through proper channel which would entail some more time," NCB has said.

The allegations have been levelled in the reply filed by the agency opposing grant of bail to Aryan Khan, Arbaaz Merchant and Munmun Dhamecha.

All three are accused in the infamous cruise ship drugs case.

They 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, after six and five grams of charas was allegedly seized from Merchant and Dhamecha respectively.

They have approached the special court after a magistrate's court rejected his bail application on the grounds that it was not maintainable.

A Special NDPS Court in Mumbai is set to hear their cases shortly.

Follow this thread for live-updates.

Meanwhile, opposing the grant of bail, NCB has claimed that the material collated during investigation has primarily revealed that Aryan Khan has a role in so far as illicit procurement and distribution of contraband is concerned.

It is said that there is prima facie sufficient material in form of WhatsApp chats, pictures etc to show that Khan was an active part of the illicit drug chain with other co-accused persons.

"It is prima facie revealed that A1(Aryan Khan) used to procure contraband from A2 (Arbaaz Merchant) and the sources connected to A2(Arbaaz) from whose conscious possession 6 gms of charas was recovered," the reply states.

NCB further claims that Aryan Khan and Arbaaz have been associated in moving/ close collaboration which is sufficient to make out offences, particularly Section 29 (conspiracy) of the NDPS Act.

Further it is highlighted that Aachit Kumar, who was arrested based on the statement made by Aryan Khan, has been arrested with 2.6 gms of Ganja.

"On basis of credible Information given by this Applicant (Aryan), the Respondent has made seizures as stated above. Thus, the culpable mental state u/s 35 of the Act of this Applicant is clearly established," the reply adds.

It has also referred to arrests of several suppliers and has claimed that all the accused persons form a part of a "larger chain", nexus and their involvement in conspiracy to commit illegal acts and violations under section 29 cannot be ruled out.

It is said that since there has been a seizure of commercial quantities of contraband, the case one applicant from whose person recovery is not made "cannot be considered in isolation" as every case is connected and is "intertwined with each other".

The reply states,

"Persons arrested are "inextricably connected"…Even though from some of the accused there is no recovery or less recovery of contraband, the participation by acts of such persons, who have acted in concert, conspiracy forms the basis of investigation."

It is emphasized that in the case of Rhea Chakraborty v. Union of India, it was held that all the offences under the NDPS Act are cognizable and non-bailable. Further that considering the influential person, that Khan holds in the society, he may tamper with evidence and influence other witnesses whom he personally knows is very much possible. Also the possibility of the applicant fleeing justice cannot be ruled out.

Hence, it is urged that bail be denied.


Next Story
Share it