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

'How Can Supply Of Drugs To Sushant Be Proved When He Is No More?' Lawyer Submits In Rhea Bail Hearing

Nitish Kashyap
29 Sep 2020 2:54 PM GMT
How Can Supply Of Drugs To Sushant Be Proved When He Is No More? Lawyer Submits In Rhea Bail Hearing
x

The Bombay High Court on Tuesday reserved orders on the bail applications filed by actor Rhea Chakraborty, her brother Showik Chakraborty, Sushant Singh's servants Samuel Miranda & Dileep Sawant and alleged drug peddler Abdel Basit Parihar in the case registered by Narcotics Control Bureau(NCB) for allegedly procuring drugs for the late actor Sushant Singh Rajput. Justice Sarang V...

Your free access to Live Law has expired
To read the article, get a premium account.
    Your Subscription Supports Independent Journalism
Subscription starts from
599+GST
(For 6 Months)
Premium account gives you:
  • Unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments.
  • Reading experience of Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.
Already a subscriber?

The Bombay High Court on Tuesday reserved orders on the bail applications filed by actor Rhea Chakraborty, her brother Showik Chakraborty, Sushant Singh's servants Samuel Miranda & Dileep Sawant and alleged drug peddler Abdel Basit Parihar in the case registered by Narcotics Control Bureau(NCB) for allegedly procuring drugs for the late actor Sushant Singh Rajput. 

Justice Sarang V Kotwal held hearing from 11 AM till 6.45 PM.

Appearing on behalf of accused Abdel Parihar, Advocate Taraq Sayed submitted that in cases where the offences are punishable with a maximum of one year sentence, such offences ought to be regarded as bailable under the NDPS Act. If the recoveries are small quantities, the offences are bailable.

Narrating the chronology of events, Advocate Sayed submitted that on Aug 28, Abbas Lakhani and Karan Arora were arrested with 13 grams of ganja. They were granted bail. Based on their statements, on Sep 2, Abdel Basit Parihar was arrested. Kaizan Ebrahim and Zaid Viltara were also arrested.

Adv Sayed argued that all these people have been rounded-up with a single submission that Sushant Singh was consuming drugs. No recovery has been made from the five applicants before the Court. On the basis of statements of the arrested persons, others were arrested, who were alleged to be in the trade.

"So there is a chain?", Justice Kotwal asked at this juncture.

Sayed replied : The chain allegedly ended with Sushant Singh, who died in June.(on June 14). Sushant expired in June. We are being charged with conspiracy to supply drugs to him in the month of March.

"Whatever recoveries they have made today from people like Keshwani, can that be a part of the conspiracy to supply drugs to Sushant, who is now no more? The allegation is that we facilitated the consumption of drugs by Sushant. Accepting that theory at face value at this stage, what can I be charged for? Consumption is Section 27(of NDPS Act), the accused can therefore be at most charged under Section 29. Can an offence of conspiracy be higher than the principal offence?" Adv Sayed contended.

He further argued that at the time of remand, there was no non-bailable offence. He claimed that his client Abdel Parihar is a student of architecture who lost one year. Responding to ASG Singh's submissions, Sayed asserted-

"The mischief of NCB is that they do not mention whether it is a small or commercial category. Statement recorded by NCB under Section 67 can be used only to corroborate seizure.

In a given case of no recovery, and if my involvement cumulatively does not exceed a small quantity, how can my statement be looked into unless there is a recovery of contraband".

Responding to an earlier submission made by Additional Solicotor General Anil Singh on behalf of the NCB that drug offences are worse than murder, Sayed said :

"More people in our country die smoking cigarettes and chewing gutka (than consuming drugs). So let us leave aside all the moralistic arguments".

"NCB is a premier investigation agency. They have better things to do than arrest people with few grams of charas or ganja. 19 college students have been arrested and NCB is projecting as if a drug cartel has been busted. They (NCB) are only playing with the sections. There are no specific allegations to show that I am part of a big drug syndicate."

Though 19 people have been arrested, the NCB has not recovered even 100 grams of ganja from them, he said with a sarcastic


Advocate Sayed dealt with NCB's allegation that the accused are a part of large drug syndicate, he said-

"Maybe, they have arrested people who may occasionally smoke the contraband articles. But by which stretch of imagination can the NCB argue that this is a syndicate, a cartel!

Yes, at this age, young people may do things which they should not. At the most, this is a case of consumption. Where is the evidence of conspiracy? For a cartel!"

Thereafter, Sayed said-

"We are maligning a man who is now no more. How can the offence of supply of drugs to Sushant Singh Rajput be proved when the man is no more?"



Referring to Kerala High Court's decision in KK Ashraf vs State of Kerala, Sayed quoted-

"The expression "financing" is not related to the payment of the value of the narcotic drug. On the other hand, it involves an activity other than sale or purchase of the narcotic drug, in which a person invests or provides funds or resources for facilitating the "...activities mentioned in sub-clauses (i) to (v) of clause (viiia) of Section 2 of the NDPS Act"

Sayed further questioned that suppose one sends a message to a dealer asking for 10 grams of hashish. The dealer replies he is sending and only on the basis of these two messages can an offence be proved?

Unless and until the prosecution proves that the contraband was actually delivered to me, those messages have no evidentiary value. The delivery man could have smoked the contraband himself, or could have stolen it, or could have delivered it to someone else. Without proof of actual delivery, the messages have no evidentiary value, Sayed submitted.

"If this Court is going to hold that a person can be sent to gallows on the basis of a statement recorded by NCB, without recovery, we are going to open a pandora's box. NCB is then going to rule the roost", the counsel warned.



Full updates from the hearing may be read here.

Next Story
Share it