Aryan Khan bail hearing: From No plans to consume to questioning the grounds of arrest; Arguments made by star kid’s counsel

Image Source - Instagram

Aryan Khan was arrested by the Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) on October 3, 2021, in the cruise ship drug seizure case. He was then held in NCB custody for a few days until the court remanded him to judicial custody. The star kid has been in judicial custody at Arthur Road Jail ever since. Aryan’s bail plea was rejected on Friday by the magistrate court citing that it was ‘not maintainable’. A fresh bail plea was made by Aryan Khan which is being heard today, on Wednesday. The hearing of the fresh bail plea, made by Aryan Khan, is underway in the Special NDPS court.

As the bail hearing began, Satish Maneshinde, representing Aryan Khan, son of superstar Shah Rukh Khan, said that Sr Advocate Amit Desai will argue for Aryan Khan and mentioned that he will add, if need be. During the hearing, Desai stressed on the fact how Aryan was invited by another person on October 2. Desai then went on to read the panchnama prepared by the NCB and said that “the first fact is that there is nothing recovered from Aryan Khan,” as reported by Live Law on Twitter.

Aryan Khan’s counsel said that no drugs were recovered from the star kid. He said that Aryan is not involved in the sale or purchase of any illegal substances. During the hearing in the Special Court, Desai said that ‘they’ had learnt their lesson. He further argued how many countries across the world, these narcotics substances have been legalized.

 

View this post on Instagram

 

A post shared by Bollywood Bubble (@bollywoodbubble)

Desai, arguing for Aryan spoke about the events that unfolded on October 2. He said, “He, having been invited for a party on the cruise ship, by a person named Prateek Gaba, who hasn’t been arrested. As we were in the process of checking in, we were accosted by the NCB.

Aryan Khan’s lawyer stressed upon the fact that ‘no recovery’ was made from his client. “When it comes to the secret information of use, sale and consumption, that was not Aryan Khan,” Desai said.

Amit Desai said that no drugs or cash, or MD was recovered from Aryan Khan. “He didn’t have cash to buy, nothing to sell. Only the three persons seem to have been arrested that afternoon. Though the recovery is much, I am arguing why his custody is no longer relevant. They are doing a good job by arresting many, but that doesn’t give them the right to hold on to those who are not related,” Desai said.

Aryan’s counsel argued that “illicit international drug trafficking accusations” were being dumped on the star kid. Khan’s lawyer said, “We don’t expect NCB to use it casually. See if you can even remotely suggest that this boy is involved in illicit trafficking. As per SC, this is absurd and false.

During the bail hearing, the NCB opposed the bail plea, stating that the probe has revealed Khan’s role in the conspiracy and illicit procurement, so far. Khan’s lawyer said, “Illicit trafficking is punishable under which section? 27A. The Panchnama doesn’t even talk of international trafficking. 27A was never invoked because they knew that Mr khan has not been involved in illicit trafficking.

Amit Desai mentioned how his client was arrested only for 20B, 27 r/w 35. Desai told the court how no sale, no purchase, and nothing was found in possession. He questioned how Section 20B was applied. He said, “There is no possession, sale, purchase. I don’t know how 20B can be applied.

Khan’s counsel said, “They are not peddlers, drug traffickers. This isn’t the way they should be treated. In many countries, these substances are legal. Let us not penalise these people. They have learnt their lesson.

Aryan Khan was detained on October 2 after NCB sleuths busted an alleged rave party on a cruise ship, off the coast of Mumbai. The star kid was arrested the next day under Section 8(c), 20(b), 27 and 35 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (DPS), 1985.

Also Read: Aryan Khan’s lawyer squashes claims of him being involved with illicit trafficking of drugs; calls it ‘inherently absurd’