Legal Services India - Law Articles is a Treasure House of Legal Knowledge and information, the law resources is an ever growing database of authentic legal information.

» Home
Tuesday, November 5, 2024

Aryan Khan Paying Price Of Being A Celeb, NCB An Ostrich With Head Buried IN Sand: Ex-AG Mukul Rohatgi

Posted in: medico Legal
Sun, Oct 24, 21, 16:29, 3 Years ago
star star star star star
0 out of 5 with 0 ratings
comments: 0 - hits: 4837
Aryan Khan left his home in Mumbai's Bandra to attend a party on board Cordelia Cruises' Empress ship. A two-day 'musical voyage' had been organized by a Delhi-based events company.

Before going into the details, it would be apt to first and foremost reveal that Aryan Khan who is grabbing news headlines all over be it in newspapers, magazines, news channels etc, is born on November 13, 1997 and is the eldest child of Bollywood actor Shah Rukh Khan and interior designer Gauri Khan. It deserves mentioning here that Aryan Khan holds a Bachelor's degree in Fine Arts, Cinematic Arts and Television Production from the School of Cinematic Arts at the University of Southern California in the United States. He did his schooling in the United Kingdom and Mumbai. He has two siblings – sister Suhana and brother AbRam.

Truth be told, on October 2, Aryan Khan left his home in Mumbai's Bandra to attend a party on board Cordelia Cruises' Empress ship. A two-day 'musical voyage' had been organized by a Delhi-based events company. It would be pertinent to mention that on receiving a tip-off, a team of the Narcotics Control Bureau's Mumbai unit, led by Zonal Director – Sameer Wankhede, boarded the ship disguised as passengers. What next ensued was that on board the ship, NCB officials began a search and the same night, it was reported that the NCB had seized various illegal drugs like cocaine, charas and MDMA from the ship and detained about 7 to 8 people and which included Bollywood star Shah Rukh's son Aryan Khan!

It must be mentioned that a total of 20 people, including two Nigerian nationals, have been arrested so far in the case related to the seizure of drugs following a raid at a party on the Cordelia cruise ship off the Mumbai coast on October 2, 2021! It also must be noted that Aryan Khan was formally placed under arrest by NCB at around 2 pm on October 3 that is a day after the raid. Apart from Aryan we see that two others – Munmun Dhamecha and Aryan's friend Arbaaz Merchant – were also arrested by the NCB. According to the arrest memo, Aryan Khan was placed under arrest for "involvement in consumption, sale and purchase" of contraband. The NCB had claimed to have seized 13 grams of cocaine, 5 grams of MD, 21 grams of charas, 22 pills of MDMA (ecstasy) and Rs 1.33 lakh in cash during the raid on Cordelia Cruises ship.

Charges Against Aryan Khan
To put things in perspective, Aryan Khan was charged under four Sections of the NDPS Act. These charges under four Sections of the NDPS Act are as follows:

  1. Section 8(c):
    This Section prohibits the production, manufacturing, possession, selling, purchase, transport, warehouse, use, consumption, inter-state import and export, import to and from India, or transship of any narcotic drug or psychotropic substance, except for medical or scientific purposes.
     
  2. Section 20(b):
    Under this Section, possession, cultivation, manufacture, sale, transport, and use of cannabis are punishable offences
    • If the accused is in possession of a 'small quantity', imprisonment involves a term which may extend to six months.
    • If the quantity is less than 'commercial' but greater than 'small', the imprisonment may extend to ten years.
    • If the quantity involved is 'commercial', imprisonment shall not be less than ten years but may extend to twenty years.
       
  3. Section 27:
    Under Section 27, the consumption of any narcotic drug or psychotropic substance is a punishable offence.
     
  4. Section 35:
    This Section presumes that the accused knew what they were doing. Hence, the accused will be treated guilty unless proven innocent.


Let us have a quick look at the relevant developments which took place in the Court in this high profile case. They are as follows: -

October 3, 2021: Aryan Khan is arrested around 2 pm along with seven others which includes Arbaaz Merchant, Munmun Dhamecha, Nupur Satija, Ishmeet Chadha, Mohak Jaiswal, Gomit Chopra, Vikrant Chokkar and a drug supplier from suburban Juhu in connection with a drug raid conducted by the NCB in a cruise ship off the city coast on charges of consumption, sale and purchase of narcotic drugs after an alleged rave party was busted aboard a luxury cruise liner.

October 4: During one of the first hearings in the Aryan Khan case, the NCB sought an extension of the star kid's police custody till October 11. But the court granted NCB custody of Aryan Khan and the others only till October 7.

October 7: The NCB again sought custody of Aryan which Mumbai's Magistrate Court rejects.

October 8: The Metropolitan Magistrate's court rejected the bail application filed by Aryan Khan, his friend Arbaaz Merchant and anchor-model Munmun Dhamecha stating they were not maintainable before it.

October 11: The court refused the demand of NCB and instead Aryan was sent to 14-day judicial custody. Aryan was then shifted to Mumbai's Arthur Road Jail the next day. He was being held at the NCB office till then.

October 13: The court adjourned the hearing for the next day after hearing arguments from both the sides.

October 14: The special NDPS Court Judge reserved his order on Aryan Khan's bail application. As the courts were shut for the weekend and other holidays, the next hearing was scheduled for October 20 and Aryan had to stay in jail till then.

October 20: In the afternoon, the Special NDPS Court Judge VV Patil rejected Aryan Khan's bail application along with Arbaaz Merchant and Munmun Dhamecha. In the 21-page order, the Judge VV Patil mentioned that:
Material on record shows "prima facie involvement of accused nos. 1 to 3 (Aryan Khan, Arbaaz Merchant and Munmun Dhamecha) in a grave and serious offences"... "this is not a fit case for granting bail." The order also says that considering the evidence on record, it cannot be said that they have not committed the alleged offence and if granted bail are unlikely to commit them again.

October 21: The Bombay High Court Bench of Justice NW Sambre said clearly that the bail plea of Aryan Khan will be heard next Tuesday. This clearly means that on October 26, 2021 the bail plea of Aryan Khan will be heard along with co-accused Munmun Dhamecha!

Having said this, it certainly cannot be dismissed very lightly even by Judges themselves that while delivering stinging punches on the questionable way in which Aryan Khan was arrested and has been kept in jail for so many days, none other than the former Attorney General of India (AGI) and eminent Supreme Court senior lawyer Mukul Rohatgi has said very clearly, cogently, composedly, categorically and most convincingly that the Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) is like "an Ostrich with its head buried in the sand", while the poor rich boy Aryan Khan is "paying the price of being a celeb".

It must be also noted that Mukul Rohatgi said in no uncertain terms that the law clearly states that "bail is the norm, jail is an exception" and the issue was settled many years ago by the Supreme Court, since the most established tenet of the Constitution is the 'Right to Life' 'Right to Liberty', not only for Indians, but also foreigners in India. If they want to give him (Khan) bail, it can be done right away, even on public holidays, he unequivocally declared on a private news channel as others were all attentive ears. How can what all Rohatgi has argued be dismissed lightly or taken casually by anyone?

It merits mentioning here that Rohatgi also very lightly and rationally asserted that:
It's incredible that someone remains inside (jail) for so many days without seizure of drugs or any other proof. No medical examination, so no consumption. How can he be held in custody when the maximum sentence would be one year, assuming he was found with drugs."

Needless to say, it also cannot be glossed over that other prominent personalities who stoutly came out against this and whipped the NCB also included among others eminent Congress leader Shashi Tharoor, Shiv Sena leader Kishore Tiwari, designated as MoS, top-notch lawyers like Vikas Singh and Dr Pinky Anand, both of whom are former Additional Solicitor General of India. Vikas Singh is also the present President of the Supreme Court Bar Association.

What's more, Rohatgi also trashed the NCB's dark theories of "international conspiracy" wondering who will believe that he (Khan) is a peddler or needed money so was doing it for money, plus he was not even a passenger on the cruise ship but a mere invitee, may be impromptu at the last minute. It would be instructive to mention here that Rohatgi said in no uncertain terms that:
WhatsApp chats are not evidence unless due procedures of law are followed... Confessions of an accused are not admissible as evidence without proper safeguards...

In this case, (Khan) is clearly paying the price of being a celeb." He also dismissively said that such 'run of the mill cases' come up by dozens daily and nobody even bothers about them, but because here a personality like Aryan Khan was involved the NCB is unwilling to listen to reason. We need to also pay attention here that Rohatgi's censure of the NCB came even as Khan and the other (male) co-accused, were dumped from a quarantine cell to a general cell, in the august company of other hardcore criminals in the Arthur Road Central Jail (ARCJ), which once housed the Pakistani terrorist Ajmal Kasab.

Finally, pulling the NCB's ears, Rohatgi said given the changed values in modern times, instead of harassing youngsters, the NCB should go after and nab those who are enticing the youth by supplying such 'poisons' (drugs) whether in Punjab or Mumbai or anywhere in the country. What wrong is Rohatgi saying? He is absolutely right. The point that he is trying to drive home carries a lot of force which we all need to acknowledge and admire!

Eminent lawyer – Satish Maneshinde who is Aryan Khan's advocate argued that his client was invited to the event being held on the cruise by the organizer. PTI quoted him as saying that:
No incriminating material has been recovered from him (Aryan Khan). There is no possession or evidence of consumption." Why then is he in jail for such a long time? This is the real rub!

Another senior and eminent advocate Amit Desai argued that the NCB was dumping the charge of illicit international drug trafficking on Aryan Khan 'casually'. Desai argued in the Special Court during the hearing of his bail plea in the Mumbai cruise drug bust case that no drugs were recovered from Aryan Khan and he is not involved in the sale or purchase of any illegal substances. He also said 'they' had learnt their lesson, arguing that in many countries these substances had been legalized, and that the accused should not be treated this way.

Be it noted, another eminent and senior lawyer of Apex Court as also Bombay High Court – Majeed Memon while giving his own independent view said that:
The accused is alleged to be a member in the rave party from where some contraband was found in violation to provisions of NDPS Act. It appears that the quantity allegedly attributed to him for personal consumption is small quantity and not commercial quantity and therefore the offence will be bailable." What Menon has suggested has to be appreciated and accepted. There is no valid reason to differ with what he has said!

Furthermore, it is also worth noting that Memon said candidly that:
He should get bail unless refusal is maintained. There does not appear to be any substance in allegations against him save and except his presence near the party venue and consumption of contraband under the NDPS Act. Refusal of bail after 17 days in custody in my view would result in undeserved hardship and punishment to the accused."

While further speaking about the arguments on Whatsapp chats recovered from Aryan and Arbaaz Merchant's phones, Majeed Memon minced no words to pooh-pooh NCB's allegations and stated quite forthrightly that:
Chat conversation as alleged does not aggravate the situation as it has no corroborative or substantive support. The apprehension of the prosecution that he is from an influential family and thus may tamper evidence is also a bald allegation without merit." Memon also strongly feels that Aryan Khan is being targeted because of his celebrity status.

For esteemed readers exclusive knowledge, we must go through the five arguments that lawyer Amit Desai put forward for Aryan's bail.

These arguments are as follows:

  1. The chat messages which they (NCB) tried to suggest is evidence, is an extra-judicial confession which is a weak form of evidence. And the chats have no section 65B certificate.
  2. The accused can be granted bail without affecting the investigation, when someone is in the stage of reform, he should be given a chance.
  3. Talking about mobile phones, Amit Desai said that there is a statement that it was voluntarily handed over. However, the panchnama says it was 'seized and not handed over'. There has to be a seizure memo.
  4. Two important statements (Aryan-Arbaaz) were recorded on 3rd October, Aryan was sent to judicial custody on 7th October. While sending him to judicial custody, the Magistrate said that the accused was not interrogated after the 3rd. The Magistrate was clear that Aryan was sent to judicial custody despite having NCB custody.
  5. The entire case of NCB is on the commercial quantity of drugs and conspiracy. Aryan being the consumer in this case is at the bottom. Instead of reforming Aryan, you are connecting him to accused Abdul. And Abdul is the one from whom commercial quantity is found. This is far too stretched out. If this goes on for long then what will happen to reformative law?


Absolutely right! Point well taken! We also cannot be oblivious to what late Justice VR Krishna Iyer who is one of the most eminent Indian jurist and also a former Supreme Court Judge once said quite uprightly that:
I believe in Operation Valmiki. Every saint has a past and every sinner has a future." Aryan's young age also has to be taken into account. He must be given a chance to reform, repent and rehabilitate to the mainstream!

As the jury is still out and the Bombay High Court is yet to decide this high profile case, we have to keep our fingers crossed till then! Which way the dice may roll is quite unpredictable! Let's wait and watch! But yes, one thing we have to concede: Aryan Khan has got the first jolt from the NDPS Judge-VV Patil who noted that WhatsApp chats of Aryan prima facie revealed that he was "dealing in illicit drug activities on a regular basis" and therefore it cannot be said that he was not likely to commit a similar offence if released on bail! But all is still not over for Aryan Khan and now everything hinges on how well the parties argue in Bombay High Court in this leading case and what the High Court finally rules in this high profile case!

Sanjeev Sirohi, Advocate,
s/o Col BPS Sirohi, A 82, Defence Enclave,
Sardhana Road, Kankerkhera, Meerut – 250001, Uttar Pradesh

Comments

There are no comments for this article.
Only authorized users can leave comments. Please sign in first, or register a free account.
Share
Sponsor
About Author
Sanjeev Sirohi Advocate
Member since Apr 20, 2018
Location: Meerut, UP
Following
User not following anyone yet.
You might also like
In 1929 Parliament perceived the need to qualify the child destruction. statute by a provision for preserving the life of the mother, but crassly failed to add a similar exception to the abortion section In 1861
When the Abortion Bill came before the House of Lords, much attention was given to this question.
Formerly it was thought that the vital point of time was fertilisation, the fusior of spermatozoon and ovum, but it is now realised
the paper intends to highlight the need for a concrete legal framework in reference to the recent developments to protect the rights of parties involved in the commercial surrogacy.
This article deals with the introduction of corona virus and it's legal aspects & some laws related to it in India.
incidents of manhandling of Covid patients/dead bodies. What is even more tragic to learn is that this is happening more with those patients who are not able to cough up huge astronomical sum of money as demanded by the hospitals where they are admitted
Ganta Jai Kumar v/s Telangana a medical emergency is not an excuse to trample on the fundamental rights of a citizen under Article 21 of the Constitution.
dehumanizing treatment of the Covid-19 patients and dead bodies in the hospitals etc after watching it live in India TV news channel as also other news channels especially of LNJP hospital in Delhi which has shaken the whole country beyond belief.
Supreme Court went ahead to allow a woman bearing 25 weeks old twin pregnancy, to undergo procedure for foetal reduction on the grounds of serious foetal abnormalities
Own Motion vs State Of NCT Of Delhi after taking suo motu cognizance of the grievances faced by a citizen
Abdul Shoeb Shaikh v/s K.J. Somaiya Hospital that a person suffering from Covid-19 who belongs to the economically weaker section of the society cannot be expected to produce documentary proof before seeking admission in a hospital for free treatment
Ketan Tirodkar v/s Maharashtra dismissed a public interest litigation (PIL) alleging negligence in management of dead bodies of Covid-19 victims by Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai
Karnajit De vs. Tripura Doctors are the first line defence of the country in the fight against the corona virus. It directed the Government to restore the confidence of the Doctors and para-medical staff and all concerned who are sacrificing their lives to fight against the pandemic.
Medipol Pharmaceutical India Pvt. Ltd. vs. Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education & Research considerable unexplained delay on the part of drug authorities to test a sample can render any penalty under Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940, based upon the said analysis of the sample as void.
Bikash Duria vs State of Orissa Instances of drug abuse is required to be dealt with a strict hard on Crime attitude. It was made clear that the NDPS cases should always be dealt with stricter approach of No Tolerance
Own Motion Vs. UOI safety issues faced by the general public due to the non-availability of ventilators and oxygenated beds for Coronavirus patients with moderate and severe conditions in order to reduce the death rate in Nagpur.
Jeet Ram vs. Narcotics Control Bureau Section 50 of the NDPS Act is applicable only in the case of personal search. This the Supreme Court has reiterated unambiguously while affirming the conviction of an accused who was a temple priest.
Hemant Kumar Vs Himachal Pradesh A medical officer who remains willfully absent from duty, is guilty of mis-conduct and punishment of dismissal from service cannot be said to be a harsh punishment.
RM Arun Swaminathan Vs The Principal Secretary to the Government if the autopsy reports are prepared in a shabby and unscientific manner and without actual performance of autopsies by doctors, it will lead to collapse of criminal justice delivery system in the country.
Tofan Singh vs Tamil Nadu by a 2:1 majority with Justice Indira Banerjee dissenting that officers of the Central and State agencies appointed under Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act
VetIndia Pharmaceuticals Limited vs. Uttar Pradesh set aside an indefinite blacklisting order issued in the year 2009 against VetIndia Pharmaceuticals Limited.
We all keep hearing the old adages like Where woman is worshipped, God resides there and When you educate a man you educate an individual but when you educate a woman you educate the entire family so on
Dr AKB Sadbhavana Mission School Of Homeo Pharmacy vs The Secretary, Ministry Of AYUSH has minced no words to clarify that homeopathy can be used in preventing and mitigating Covid-19 as per AYUSH ministry guidelines. Thus some observations made by the Kerala High Court were modified on this score
To Curb The Increasing Menace Of Drug Abuse vs Kerala directions to control drug abuse among youngsters and students in educational institutions.
Gurdev Singh v/s Punjab quantity of narcotic substance is a relevant factor that can be taken into account for imposing higher than the minimum punishment under the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.
Patan Jamal Vali vs Andhra Pradesh taken the bold initiative to issue guidelines to make criminal justice system more disabled friendly.
Uttar Pradesh vs In Re: Inhuman Condition At Quarantine Centres And For Providing Better Treatment To Corona Positive upgrading the medical facilities in the state of Uttar Pradesh on a war-scale footing
Vivek Sheel Aggarwal vs UOI It is not for the Court to render advice much less issue directions to the Government on the line of treatment that is required to be followed for COVID
Tripura, Agartala v. UOI, wherein it has directed the Central Government, Ministry of Home Affairs to take appropriate steps for amending Section 27A of the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985 without further delay.
Sonu Bairwa Vs State of MP & Ors black marketing of remdesivir injection has direct impact on public order, and the petitioner-accused if released, could indulge into same activity because the scarcity of remdesivir is still there.
Not permitting a rape victim, suffering from severe mental problems, to undergo Medical Termination of unwarranted pregnancy would be violative of her bodily integrity which would not only aggravate her mental trauma but would also have devastating effect on her overall health including on psychological and mental aspects.
Jose Luis Quintanilla Sacristan vs UP since a report of State Forensic Science Laboratory is admissible in evidence (as per the provision of Section 293 CrPC), therefore, there is no requirement to call the Director of that laboratory to get the same proved.
Radhakrishna Pillai v. District Level Authorization Committee for transplantation of Human Organs, Ernakulam criminal antecedents of a person cannot be criteria when it comes to organ donation and the Transplantation of Human Organs and Tissues Act, 1994 do not make any such distinction against persons with criminal record.
doctors themselves as also the hospital staff are themselves not safe in our country and are abused, attacked and assaulted by some disgruntled attendants of patients
Ashok Kumar vs Raj Gupta that forcing an unwilling party to undergo DNA test impinges on personal liberty and right to privacy.
Dr.P Basumani vs The Tamil Nadu Medical Council the Madras High Court quashed an order dated May 4, 2021 of the Tamil Nadu Medical Council (TNMC) suspending a gastroenterologist by observing that principles of natural justice were not given credence to.
All India Kamgar General Union vs Union of India Delhi High Court has issued detailed directives to Central Government Hospitals to ensure that no improper and corrupt practices are indulged in by the contractors in respect of engagement of contractual workmen.
Jasmeet Singh Hakimzada vs National Investigation Agency refused to quash an NIA case against Jasmeet Singh Hakimzada, who is allegedly a Dubai-based international drug smuggler, by taking into account the allegations against him of reviving terrorism in the State of Punjab
Mohd Zahid vs State through NCB discretion to direct subsequent sentence to run concurrently with the previous sentence has to be exercised judiciously depending upon the nature of offences committed.
PD Gupta vs Delhi it expects a little more sensitivity from the Delhi Government when it is dealing with claims for reimbursement of medical expenses of senior citizens who are their own retired employees.
Sandeep Kumar v. Punjab Police on their knuckles for their callously casual approach towards their official duty even when the drug menace has become a deep-rooted in the state of Punjab.
Dr. (Mrs.) Chanda Rani Akhouri Vs Dr MA Methusethupathi in exercise of its civil appellate jurisdiction delivered as recently as on April 20, 2022 has laid down in no uncertain terms that merely because doctors could not save the patient
The National Medical Commission vs Pooja Thandu Naresh that the National Medical Commission is not bound to grant provisional registration to the student who has not completed the entire duration of the course from the Foreign Institute including the clinical training.
Aravinth RA vs Secretary To Government Of India Ministry Of Health upheld the validity of Regulations 4(a)(ii), 4(b) & 4(c) of the National Medical Commission (Foreign Medical Graduate Licentiate) Regulations 2021, Schedule II 2(a) and 2(c)(i) of the National Medical Commission
State v. Sheikh Sehzad has released an accused charged under Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act on interim bail while observing that every millisecond of unnecessary detention makes a substantial difference and tantamount to an unwarranted interference with the rights of the accused.
Mohan Singh vs UP allowed the conduct of DNA test in a murder trial as it noted that the same was in the interests of justice to unearth the truthfulness of the prosecution's case.
Farooq Ahmad Bhat Vs Syed Basharat Saleem that before prosecuting medical professionals for the offence of criminal negligence, a Criminal Court should obtain opinion of the medical expert
Inayath Ali v/s Telangana allowing DNA testing to determine the paternity of two children to verify a claim made by their mother that she had been forced to cohabit and develop a physical relationship with her brother-in-law.
Davinder Singh Vs Punjab that the drug peddlers have successfully destroyed the social fabric of society and led youth to the wrongful path.
Top