Aryan Khan Gets Bail Violation Of Article 22

Table of Contents

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.