From Jail to Bail: Aryan Khan

Bollywood’s superstar Shahrukh Khan’s son, Aryan Khan, has been in the headlines for the past few days after his arrest in the drugs raid by Narcotics Bureau Officers on a Mumbai cruise ship. Aryan Khan was arrested by the Narcotics Control Bureau Offices, who are in disguise, the cruise ship, and his other friends Arbaaz Merchant and Munmun Dhamecha. Aryan Khan and Arbaaz merchant’s word lodged in Arthur Road jail, and Munmun Dhamecha was installed in the women’s prison at Byculla. Mukul Rohatgi, a former attorney general, represented the case of Ayan Khan in the court and pleaded for the bail of his client. This plea was opposed by ACG Anil Singh, the lawyer of the Narcotics Control Bureau, and he claimed that, as per records, Aryan Khan has been consuming and providing drugs regularly for two years. ACG Anil Singh also argued that even if the person did not consume the drugs, mere possession of them allows him to be booked under the NDPS act. Aryan Khan made the contention that he was not found in possession of narcotics, but his childhood friend Arbaaz merchant possessed it. Counteracting this contention, Singh made a statement that even if the physical control was absent, Aryan possessed the knowledge, and therefore it can be claimed as a conscious possession. He also stated that charges are applicable even when a mere attempt was made or was to be made.

Speculations of drug trafficking we made were based on the chats of the three suspects. Another lawyer representing Aryan, Amit Desai, while reading the filed panchnama in the case, emphasized that the words in the punchnama were ” except personal consumption”, which proves that no allegations of personal use were stated in the arrest memo. It was also contested by him that if the intention to consume was to be taken as a factor, then I’m a degree test should have been done to prove such a factor and about the allegation under section 20(b) a contested that the said section deals with the position and joint position and not consumption. He also stated that no WhatsApp chats supported the theory of conspiracy. This site mentioned that the chats were not admissible in the absence of a 65b certificate i.e., electronic evidence must be favored. It was also mentioned that the seizure memo was absent relating to the seized phones, and the handover was voluntary.

The lawyer of Aryan Khan, Rohatgi stated to the court that his the client who is invited as a guest by Pratik Gaba at the cruise party and he was not in a position of any drugs and therefore his arrest was wrongful. It was also argued by him that in the cases where the quantity of possession of drugs is small, a maximum of one year in prison mint can be provided and in case of consumption, rehabilitation should be provided according to the law. It has been told by Rohatgi in the court that Arbaaz merchant, the friend of his client Vasant, possession of 6grams of charas, and his client had no connection to it. Also, no proof was furnished for the allegation of consumption.

On 28 October, Thursday, the Bombay High Court ruled in the favor of 23-year-old Aryan Khan and is accompanying friends Arbaaz merchant and Munmun Dhamecha by granting them bail.

On what grounds was the bail denied earlier?

On 20th October, Aryan Khan was denied bail on the grounds that is WhatsApp chats signaled his indulgence in illicit drug activities on a regular basis. Later on, as we know, it was argued by the lawyers of Aryan Khan about the admissibility of his WhatsApp chats. Section 65 of the Indian evidence act deals with the admissibility of electronic evidence, which adding two no is considered as secondary evidence until the device itself is produced before the court. According to subsection for section 65b of the act, a certificate must be obtained to favor electronic evidence, which forms part of the process. In the absence of such a certificate, electronic evidence is not considered admissible, as argued by Desai, unless the device is produced before the court.