Aryan Khan Case: 10 Arguments That Were Made at Khan’s Bail Hearing

For the second day running, a special court in Mumbai heard arguments for and against bail for Aryan Khan and others accused in the Mumbai cruise drugs case. At the end of the session, Judge VV Patil reserved his order.

As a result, Bollywood superstar Shah Rukh Khan’s son Aryan will remain lodged at Arthur Road Jail in Mumbai at least until October 20, when the court will reopen after the Dussehra holidays and the weekend.

What were the major arguments put forward by the lawyers of the accused as well as the Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) during the hearing? Let’s take a look at the arguments that took place in the courtroom. 

NCB’S ARGUMENTS AGAINST BAIL

The NCB claimed that conspiracy forms the base of their investigation. The agency stated that none of the accused can be isolated and hence, the amount of drugs obtained from them is inconsequential.

• ASG Anil Singh stated in Court that the panchnama says the contraband (6 grams) was obtained from Arbaaz Merchantt, alleging that Aryan Khan knew of the possession, and added that it “would amount to conscious possession.”
• “Aryan Khan can ‘tamper’ with evidence if given bail. He is not a first time consumer. The evidence placed on record shows he is a regular consumer of contraband since the last few years”.

• Singh said that 6gms of charas found from Arbaaz Merchantt’s shoe was for him and Aryan’s consumption. “He (Aryan) was in conscious possession of the contraband because they have admitted it was for both of them. Therefore the argument that he was not found in possession, must be discarded”, the NCB’s petition stated.

• During the hearing, the ASG also argued that “Innocent until proven guilty” doesn’t apply in the cases of NDPS offences. “In the NDPS Act, the presumption is of culpable mental state, and it is for the accused to prove that he was not in possession during trial”, Singh said.

• “Conspiracy takes place secretly. There cannot be direct evidence. Only conspirators know what they have done and so only through circumstantial evidence, it can be seen as to how there is conspiracy.”

• “It is wrong to say they are young, so give them bail. They are the future and the entire country will be depending on this generation. This is the land of Mahatma Gandhi. This is not what they [freedom fighters] fought for.”

ARYAN KHAN’S LAWYERS’ ARGUMENTS FOR BAIL

• We won freedom and we have to ensure that the future generations take precautions against the drug menace and save their health. Kudos to the NCB for their work. But they [NCB officials] should do it diligently and rightfully, which is also something that we fought for.

• Somebody’s liberty is at stake. Without the investigation being affected, bail can still be granted.

• The government has talked about involvement of NGOs and sensitisation of people against the harm caused by drugs. Legal reforms for rehabilitation of consumers have been brought in. I am not saying my client is an addict but the law states that addicts have to be seen sympathetically.

• Everyone is equal before the law. So, even a celebrity does not deserve extra harshness. Law should be the same for all.

• Today’s WhatsApp chats between friends can sound different. You can go ahead and investigate, but these have nothing to do with illicit drug trafficking. Context is important when we deal with evidentiary value. The WhatsApp chats are extrajudicial confessions, which are weak kinds of evidence.

Stay updated for such news and updates!