On Tuesday, Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi made submissions on behalf of Aryan Khan, son of Bollywood actor Shahrukh Khan, who had sought for bail from the Bombay High Court in the cruise ship drug case..Here are five arguments made by Rohatgi in Court today:.1. "Conscious possession” of substance carried by Arbaaz Merchant cannot be consideredIt could not have been possible for Khan to have known that Merchant was in possession of contraband (charas) in his shoes, which Merchant himself claims is planted.Merchant was not a subordinate or servant over whom Khan had any sort of control to have known that he is possessing drugs..2. Invocation of Section 29 NDPS Act is an afterthoughtThree persons including Khan were arrested on October 3, and yet Section 29 (punishment for abetment and criminal conspiracy) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act) was not invoked against them in the arrest memo.However, when the next set of accused were produced in Court, Section 29 was added..3. Legislative intent of the NDPS ActNot retributory but reformatory.Consumption and small quantity seizures be sent to de-addiction centres instead of jail.The offences against Khan are under Sections 8(c), 20(b) and 27, which all pertain to consumption and use, for which the punishment is imprisonment for one year..4. WhatsApp chats do not prove conspiracyThe WhatsApp chats relied upon by the Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) were exchanged much earlier.Chats might have been exchanged while Khan was in a country like USA, where cannabis is legal.Conspiracy is when all twenty (accused) have met before and there is a meeting of minds..5. No recovery or proof of consumption of substanceThere was no recovery of banned substance from Khan.To substantiate the offence of consumption, there was no medical examination conducted..Senior Advocate Amit Desai supplemented the submissions made by Rohatgi today, after which Justice Nitin Sambre of the Bombay High Court adjourned the matter. The case will now be heard on Wednesday..Meanwhile, two co-accused were granted bail by the Sessions Court in the case in which Khan is the prime accused. Manish Rajgarhiya and Avin Sahu were granted bail by Special Judge VV Patil, who had earlier rejected the bail plea of Khan and other co-accused..[BREAKING] First bail in Aryan Khan Drug case; Co-accused Manish Rajgarhiya, Avin Sahu get bail
On Tuesday, Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi made submissions on behalf of Aryan Khan, son of Bollywood actor Shahrukh Khan, who had sought for bail from the Bombay High Court in the cruise ship drug case..Here are five arguments made by Rohatgi in Court today:.1. "Conscious possession” of substance carried by Arbaaz Merchant cannot be consideredIt could not have been possible for Khan to have known that Merchant was in possession of contraband (charas) in his shoes, which Merchant himself claims is planted.Merchant was not a subordinate or servant over whom Khan had any sort of control to have known that he is possessing drugs..2. Invocation of Section 29 NDPS Act is an afterthoughtThree persons including Khan were arrested on October 3, and yet Section 29 (punishment for abetment and criminal conspiracy) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act) was not invoked against them in the arrest memo.However, when the next set of accused were produced in Court, Section 29 was added..3. Legislative intent of the NDPS ActNot retributory but reformatory.Consumption and small quantity seizures be sent to de-addiction centres instead of jail.The offences against Khan are under Sections 8(c), 20(b) and 27, which all pertain to consumption and use, for which the punishment is imprisonment for one year..4. WhatsApp chats do not prove conspiracyThe WhatsApp chats relied upon by the Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) were exchanged much earlier.Chats might have been exchanged while Khan was in a country like USA, where cannabis is legal.Conspiracy is when all twenty (accused) have met before and there is a meeting of minds..5. No recovery or proof of consumption of substanceThere was no recovery of banned substance from Khan.To substantiate the offence of consumption, there was no medical examination conducted..Senior Advocate Amit Desai supplemented the submissions made by Rohatgi today, after which Justice Nitin Sambre of the Bombay High Court adjourned the matter. The case will now be heard on Wednesday..Meanwhile, two co-accused were granted bail by the Sessions Court in the case in which Khan is the prime accused. Manish Rajgarhiya and Avin Sahu were granted bail by Special Judge VV Patil, who had earlier rejected the bail plea of Khan and other co-accused..[BREAKING] First bail in Aryan Khan Drug case; Co-accused Manish Rajgarhiya, Avin Sahu get bail