Aryan Khan remand hearing in NDPS case [LIVE UPDATES from Mumbai court]

Besides Khan, Arbaaz Merchant, Munmun Dhamecha, Nupur Sarika, Ismeet Singh, Mohak Jaswal, Vikrant Chhoker and Gomit Chopra who were being questioned have been arrested.

Merchant and Dhamecha were remanded to NCB custody as well.

The accused have been booked for offences under Sections 8(c), 20(b), 27, 28, 29 and 35 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act.

Live updates on today's hearing below.

A Mumbai court had on Sunday evening granted the Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) custody of Aryan Khan, son of Bollywood actor Shah Rukh Khan till today in relation to drugs found on Cordelia Cruises' Empress ship on which a rave party allegedly took place.

Hearing before Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate RM Nerlikar.

Advocate Satish Maneshinde to appear for Khan. Advocate Sartaj Shaikh to appear for Dhamecha and Merchant.

Special Public Prosecutor Advait Sethna to appear for NCB.

Additional Solicitor General Anil Singh to appear for NCB and will be seeking further custody.

The Magistrate has presided. The accused are yet to be produced.

NCB sources state that one additional person will be produced for remand apart from the 8 already arrested. And one more will be arrested today.

So, as of now, 9 accused including Aryan Khan will be produced in Court for remand.

The 5 arrested have been accused of Section 27A of NDPS Act.

Khan and two others who were remanded to NCB custody on Sunday do not have 27A in their fresh remand.

ASG begins his submissions in remand for Khan.

ASG: We are seeking custody till October 11.

The offences 8(c), 20(b), 27, 28, 29. There are 5 more connected persons who are under investigation. Thus, there are 8 persons.

ASG: There is incriminating material found through WhatsApp chats with drug peddlers. Raids are going on now. Shocking incriminating material in WhatsApp shows international drug trafficking.

ASG: There is investigation about the payment modes and the several codes which were used. All the accused need to be confronted. The international transactions need to be investigated.

ASG: I am seeking custody for further investigation. These are three persons who were arrested from Mumbai to Goa. in their possessions, the items which were found are set out.

There is another group of persons involved who are being investigated.

ASG: The argument I am expecting is all these offences are bailable.

I have three judgements of Bombay High Court that all NDPS offences are non-bailable.

ASG: We have also raided this supplier and we have found commercial quantity. Kindly see the judgments.

ASG is reading Bombay High Court Judgment of Rhea Chakraborty to point out all NDPS offences are non-bailable.

ASG: object of Act has to be seen and it is to curb the offence in society. Ultimately there were connected matters in which this view was taken. The Court took a consistent view that all offences are non-bailable.

ASG: Ultimately, the person may not be found with commercial quantity but then custody is required to find out the chain or links.

Where is the financing made, who is the source, all this needs to be found out. So we are only asking for a few more days of custody.

ASG: We arrested more persons. These all need to be found out.

Taking drugs has become very common. College going kids are taking.

ASG: Regular students may get influenced due to the high-profile persons taking drugs. Hence, we are trying to curb the menace. All three should be sent to NCB custody.

ASG: The organizers of the party have been intercepted too. They may be connected to each other. Since when is it happening, how many persons are involved, the group or the gang has to be found out.

Advocate Maneshinde: I am not seeking bail as a matter of right. I was detained by NCB not in cruise ship. I was special invitee. I landed there with another friend of mine.

Maneshinde: I did not know which cabin was allotted to me, but I have not paid a single penny to the ship. I do not know anyone from the organizers.

Maneshinde: The panchnama does not indicate anything seized from me except my mobile. My friend was arrested because he had 6 gms of charas, with which even I was not connected.

Maneshinde: The drugs that have been seized as mentioned in the remand have not been seized from any one of us. It was from other co-accused with which ai have been linked. I cannot be roped in with seizure.

Maneshinde: Upon further interrogation, they have downloaded my WhatsApp chats. While I was abroad, they claim that my chats indicate international drug trafficking. The entire period of my stay abroad, I have not been involved in any trafficking, supply or distribution.

Maneshinde: My chats, downloads, pictures, nothing indicates any involvement. If there are chats which discuss drugs, those can be seen, it will not indicate any drug trafficking.

Maneshinde: The provisions invoked are 8(c), 20(b), 27, etc. None of these are embargo for bail application under Section 37 NDPS.

Maneshinde: The facts of Rhea’s case are that 27A was invoked which has embargo under Sec 37. My lord may consider my bail and refusal for remand. Recovery is not necessary and there are no grounds for further custody.

ASG: This is custody application. He can meet my application for that. But he cannot argue bail before that.

Magistrate: The arguments seem like he (Maneshinde) is seeking police custody and also arguing for bail.

Maneshinde cites a judgment to show how the commercial quantity found with one accused cannot be used for incriminating another accused.

Maneshinde also submits a Supreme Court judgment to show how the WhatsApp chats cannot be used for incriminating an accused.

Maneshinde: Assuming my friend has WhatsApp chats, the High Court has said what is international financing and illicit trafficking.

Maneshinde reads Rhea Chakraborty’s judgment.

Maneshinde argues on the aspect of bailability and non-bailability of the offences under NDPS.

Bail for non-bailable offence is provided by Supreme Court. Reads a judgment.

Maneshinde: Submission maybe made that these are non-bailable, still this Court has power to grant bail.

Maneshinde (on lighter note): I took only 5 minutes yesterday. Ask anyone.

Me and Arbaz were found together but that does not mean there is nothing to do with us.

Maneshinde: There is no evidence to show that they purchased drugs or sold.

The fetters under Section 37 will not be applicable. I am also a 24-year-old boy, who does not have antecedents. What was on others cannot be foisted on me.

Maneshinde: As of now 48 hours nothing has been found against me. Any prayer for further custody may be rejected. Whatever they had to interrogate with me, they have. I have co-operated, and they also were nice to me. I showed my good conduct. Did not delete anything.

Maneshinde: Mere chatting on phone without corroboration does not exist. Hence, further custody is not required.

Advocate Tareq Sayed for Merchant.

Sayed: There is no clarity on the application. We need copy of panchnama for proper adjudication. There is no clarity on where the recovery is made, from whom and how much. There are only chats that are recovered.

Sayed: The chats maybe of 5 years ago. Are they going to implicate me, keep me in custody for chats made earlier?

All those WhatsApp chats may show that I ordered 5 gms of ganja. But then did I use it? The department may arrest anyone for future use.

Sayed: The recoveries are made under one panchnama. Khan has no recoveries; Merchant is claimed to have 5 gms. But the other seizures like MDMA, and cocaine are not attributed to them. Did they commit any act bringing them under 8(c)?

Sayed: Kindly see that their submission is trying to find out the cartel and catch. How are you interrogating two people on a premise of 5 gms for two days?

Sayed: Has NCB come to this? Interrogating two boys.

They have arrested one and two because they are high profile persons.

Sayed: NCB has been doing this.. On the basis of small quantity, they have arrested 2 persons and then 8 persons and without assigning specific roles to each individual.

Sayed: The allegation is that there is sufficient quantity recovered. But how am I concerned for the other recoveries. Do they have any evidence of any connection?

Sayed: Their own case is that they had different purposes. It is nobody’s case that the ship left the shore. The accused were only at the dock when they were intercepted.

Sayed: After two days of remand, you have chats between two friends. Those may be chats NCB does not like. But the charge will be framed for what is to be recovered.

Sayed: For every aspect we have co-operated fully, and no further custody is required.

Maneshinde: The accused have been found in possession of 13 gms is what Special PP said yesterday. They have to clarify that they have not found that with the other accused.

Ali Kaashif Khan Deshmukh appears for Dhamecha. Submits that she had nothing to do with one and two. I want judicial custody, he says.

ASG: Except for last 5 minutes everything else was on bail application. He was not in a position to point out the reason for refusing custody.

He showed judgment of Rhea Chakraborty and Stefan Muller.

ASG: The learned judge of Bombay High Court was referring to the judgment in Baldev Singh case of Supreme Court.

ASG: What is mentioned in the messages may not be relevant for the remand hearing, but I will still request the court to read. There are chats with unknown persons and those includes chats with unknown persons. There are chats on bulk purchase. That has to be investigated.

Magistrate: What do you want to prove with this?

ASG: This shows that there was some connection, there was regular contact with the person. That may show the supplier and it may show someone totally innocent.

ASG: What is there to show you were invited? You were found in the custody of the persons with whom the contraband was found.

ASG: You have earlier communication with persons dealing with the drugs. These are all circumstances leading to the investigation. We are on the stage of remand and there will be further investigation.

ASG: Possession is not material for investigation.

ASG: We are at preliminary stage of investigation. Hence, bail need not be considered now. Please consider extension of time for custody.

Court: From whom was seizure effected?

NCB officer: 6 gms of charas from Merchant. Small quantity. Dhamecha was found with 5 gms charas. Small quantity again. Only these two recoveries. Vikrant had 5 gms MDMA.

Officer: 10 gms cocaine also with Vikrant. This is intermediate quantity. Ishmeet Singh also found with 14 MDMA pills. Gomit 4 pills of MDMA ecstasy & 3 gms of cocaine. Nupur had 4 MDMA pills.

Jaiswal has no recovery, but he provided Nupur with pills.

Officer: the intermediate peddlers were supposed to be providing. The organisers boarded the ship, and they did not co-operate.

In the afternoon we intercepted those officers, and we want to know what link the accused, the consumers have.

Officer: The other accused were in custody and therefore, we were invitees, and we did not even enter. For the last 48 hours there is nothing to connect me to the ship.

ASG: There were 1300 people on the ship..

Maneshinde: It is not their case that Khan was selling drugs in ship, if he wants, he can buy the ship!

Sayed: They already had three days of custody.

Sethna: The question is why 8 out of the 1400 people.. that we are targeting him. We need these 8 for confronting. We need a reasonable opportunity to find out at least.

Court: If you found recovery with no. 2 and 3, then why not put 22 against them?

Sethna states that investigators need to be given an opportunity.

Maneshinde: There is nothing on Khan. Even if their case is, I consumed somewhere else that is not the case here. There are 1000 people on the ship. Investigate them also.

Sethna: Even if first person is a high profile, there is possession with second person.. and discovery of truth needs to be done.

ORDER: NCB superintendent Mumbai have no complaints. They are seeking custody till Oct 11. ASG Anil Singh for NCB. Heard accused 1-3 at length. Gone through decisions.

ORDER: 13 gms of cocaine, 22 pills and 1.33 rupees were found and seized. Subsequent, crime was registered. During investigation, the officers state accused were involved in sale, purchase under 8(c). Accordingly they were produced before Holiday Court.

ORDER: NCB custody was granted. They argued that incriminating material was found, and NCB was conducting fresh raids. The incriminating material coupled with fresh arrests need to be corroborated. The other accused were arrested, and new facts need to be verified.

ORDER: Shocking information from #1 and incriminating material was found prosecution stated.

ORDER: So far as seizure is affected and the assumption from the chats, the alleged contraband is seized, there is nothing to show the case against accused. Hence, they prayed for judicial custody.

ORDER: All the offences under NDPS are non-bailable. Therefore, question of bailable or non-bailable do not arise. What is essential to consider is whether the custody is to be given or not.

ORDER: The co-accused possess intermediate contraband. The accused accompanied them. Investigation is of prime importance. It will be essential for prosecution and accused to prove is innocent.

Sethna (for the other accused): The other accused were connected, and we need to find out the collective connection.

Advocate Kushal Mor for Gomit Chopra states that all 8 accused were arrested together and detained together but only the first three were produced on Sunday.

Advocate for another accused: They were detained since October 2, and there are 5 more persons who are apprehended allegedly. This was also there in the remand of October 3. If they were in custody, then why not produced?

Mor: When the Court is being sought for extending custody, there has to be a detailed remand.

Mor: When the court is tasked with further custody then the Court needs to be shown the details. NCB needs to show why further police custody is required.

Mor: For that, investigation agency is supposed to make out a strong case that without police custody, investigation cannot proceed.

The remand application has paragraphs copies from yesterday’s remand.

Advocate for accused no. 5: There is clear definition of harbouring or financing. Nothing has been possessed from me. I have been detained for more than 36 hours.

Sartaj: The remand applications are vague, what has been recovered, nothing is known. The NCB agency are deciding whom to produce before holiday and whom before regular court just because they are central agency.

Sethna: I am only arguing on illegal detention. The arrest memo is before Your Lordship. At 1900 hours on Sunday Vikrant was arrested, at 1830 hours Gomit and Ishmeet Singh, 1740 hours Nupur was arrested. Within stipulated time all have been produced.

Sethna: I am making this statement with responsibility.

Are we supposed to disclose and decide when are we going to arrest and decide? Times are given, within 24 hours were produced.

Sethna: These five have much worse offences as they have intermediate quantities, and they are seeking judicial custody.

Sethna: Investigation without interrogation would lead to raw investigation.

Accused lawyers say that they have not been provided with remand application, panchnama copies.

Court states that if remand copies are not provided then the accused will not be able to argue.

Court order for other 5 accused: The accused have been produced at 6 pm in Court. The Special Public Prosecutor argued that the investigation against the others clearly show that the accused were dealing on regular basis. The incriminating material needs to be verified.

Order: The known and unknown have to be checked and warranted. The learned counsel for accused come with a case that remand application has no specific allegations against the accused. Based on vague allegations, the custody of accused cannot be granted in a casual manner.

Order: Prosecution has to show special circumstances for granting NCB custody and that arrest of accused is illegal as they were detained for more than 24 hours. For reasons stated no remand to NCB but judicial custody is sought.

Order: After going through the arguments, I do not find substance in accused arguments. panchnama and arrest memo show the date and time. The arrest custody is required. Their presence is necessary for detailed investigation.