Home   »   Aryan Khan Gets Bail Violation Of...

Aryan Khan Gets Bail Violation Of Article 22 – Free PDF Download


What has happened?

  • The Bombay High Court has granted bail to Aryan Khan in connection with the alleged cruise ship drug case.
  • Justice NW Sambre also allowed bail to his friends and co-accused in the matter, Arbaaz Merchant and Munmun Dhamecha.
  • Though bail has been allowed, the three accused will be released tomorrow after specification of the bail conditions in the detailed order.

  • Bail was granted after hearing Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi for Aryan Khan and ASG Anil Singh for the Narcotics Control Bureau.
  • The Bench also heard Senior Advocate Amit Desai for
  • Arbaaz Merchant and Advocate Ali Kashiff Khan Deshmukh for Munmun Dhamecha.

Aryan Khan’s case

  • It was argued on behalf of Aryan Khan, represented by Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi, that his arrest was made in sheer violation of Article 22 of the Constitution,
  • Inasmuch as he was not informed about the correct grounds for arrest.

  • On his connection with Aachit Kumar, an alleged drug peddler, Rohatgi submitted on behalf of Khan.
  • Aachit was arrested with 2.4 gms. Dealers cannot have just 2.4 gms.“
  • He added that it’s a clear case of no possession, no consumption and no recovery of drugs.

WhatsApp chat

  • Rohatgi also submitted that none of the WhatsApp chats recovered from Khan’s phone relate to the cruise party.
  • It is further argued that WhatsApp messages have no evidentiary value and a person’s liberty for an offence punishable with one year cannot be deprived on such basis.
  • Senior advocate Amit Desai argued in the Bombay High Court and said “Punjab and Haryana High Court and Bombay High Court have held that WhatsApp chats are inadmissible”.
  • “Only thing they are using to keeping us in custody is WhatsApp chats, which were from before. There are no WhatsApp chats in any manner whatsoever supporting conspiracy theory”.
  • “They (devices) were seized but there is no panchnama.
  • Based on this, there has been speculation of drug trafficking, it is absurd.
  • The device is not with us, there is no panchnama and seizure report in relation to phones.
  • Punjab and Haryana HC and Bombay HC have held that WhatsApp chats are inadmissible.”
  • It was also contended that NCB’s case relies heavily on “voluntary” statements given under Section 67 of the NDPS Act,
  • Which are inadmissible in evidence as per last year’s Supreme Court judgment in the Tofan Singh case.

NCB’s case

  • ASG Anil Singh on behalf of NCB argued that in the accused’ WhatsApp chat there is a specific reference to bulk quantity, and that Khan is not a first–time consumer.
  • Regarding admissibility of the chats, the ASG said they have a 65B certificate as required under the Indian Evidence Act and the chats are thus admissible.
  • “Accused number 1 (Aryan Khan) is not a first-time consumer,” said the NCB’s lawyer Anil Singh, the Additional Solicitor General.
  • “He is a regular consumer since last few years and he has been procuring drugs.
  • There is a reference of procuring drugs in commercial quantity and the drugs are hard drugs. He has been in contact with peddlers,“ said Mr Singh.
  • He pointed out that when Khan was apprehended, multiple drugs were found from 8 people (of the 11 people named in the secret note received by the agency).
  • Thus, a cumulative effect has to be seen.
  • “It has to be investigated… cumulative drug quantity was of commercial quantity,” ASG Anil Singh said.

Mukul Rohatgi’s argument

  • Mr Rohatgi countered that there were 1,300 people on the cruise.
  • “There are 500 rooms in the Taj. If two people are consuming in two rooms will you hold the entire hotel?
  • There is absolutely no material for purposes of conspiracy,“ he said.

“Bail is rule, jail is exception”

  • It is a legal doctrine that was laid down by the Supreme Court of India in a landmark judgement of State of Rajasthan vs. Balchand alias Baliya (AIR 1977 2447).
  • The legal doctrine, in this case, was laid down by Justice V. Krishna Aiyer, who based it on fundamental Rights guaranteed by the constitution of India.
  • Every accused person is presumed to be innocent until proved guilty.
  • The effect of granting bail is not to set the accused free, but to release him from custody and to entrust him to his own bond.
  • Thus, Bail is security obtained from a person arrested regarding an offence for the purpose of securing his presence during the course of a trial.
  • Section 436 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, lays down that a person accused of a bailable offence under I.P.C. can be granted bail.
  • On the other hand, Section 437 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,1973 lays down that the accused does not have the right to bail in non-bailable offences.
  • It is the discretion of the court to grant bail in case of non-bailable offences.

Q) Guwahati High Court does not have territorial jurisdiction over which state?

  1. Meghalaya
  2. Arunachal Pradesh
  3. Mizoram
  4. Nagaland




Latest Burning Issues | Free PDF


Sharing is caring!

Download your free content now!


We have received your details!

We'll share General Studies Study Material on your E-mail Id.

Download your free content now!

We have already received your details!

We'll share General Studies Study Material on your E-mail Id.

Incorrect details? Fill the form again here

General Studies PDF

Thank You, Your details have been submitted we will get back to you.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.