6 solid arguments made by Aryan Khan’s lawyer

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Reddit
  • Flipboard
  • Email
  • WhatsApp
6 solid arguments made by Aryan Khan’s lawyer (Image Instagrammed @___aryan___)
6 solid arguments made by Aryan Khan’s lawyer (Image Instagrammed @___aryan___)

Mumbai : Bombay High Court on Wednesday adjourned the bail hearing of Aryan Khan, Arbaaz Khan, and Munmun Dhamecha to Thursday after the lawyers of the accused argued against NCB in court. Both Aryan and Arbaaz were represented by senior advocate Amit Desai on Wednesday while senior advocate Ali Kaashif Khan Deshmukh argued for Munmun in court. 

The court proceedings started around 4 pm on Wednesday when Desai argued that there is no case against the son of Bollywood superstar Shah Rukh Khan and yet he is under custody for over 20 days in the Mumbai drugs case.

Here are the five major arguments that Aryan Khan’s lawyer made in the court on Wednesday:

No medical test: Amit Desai argued that the NCB didn’t conduct any blood test on Aryan Khan and therefore, no claims of consumption of drugs can be established on his part. Calling it a ‘trap’ by the NCB, the senior advocate told the court, “If the NCB officers went there to find people consuming drugs, they can do blood testing of all those. There is no blood test where consumption is proved.”

Case of consumption, not conspiracy: Aryan Khan’s lawyer told the court that it was ‘misled’ into believing that the accused were also charged under sections of conspiracy, while their first remand applications never mentioned sections 28 (Punishment for attempts to commit offences), and 29 (Punishment for abetment and criminal conspiracy) of the NDPS Act. “Till today there is no arrest for conspiracy and we are 22 days in custody because of these issues,” he said.

Bail is a norm: Desai told the court that even though nothing has been recovered from Aryan Khan and his medical test was not conducted by the NCB, the matter can at best be taken as a ‘case of consumption’, not as a ‘case of conspiracy.’ He said in the court that “bail is the rule and jail is the exception. Now it is arrest is the rule and bail is the exception.”

Why is custody required: Right before concluding his arguments in Bombay High Court, Desai asked the court about not granting bail in a case in which the maximum punishment could be of 1 year. “Nobody stops investigation if bail is given. But, what is the need for custody when Punishment is one year?” he asked.

No WhatsApp chats to establish conspiracy: The lawyer argued against NCB’s claims of WhatsApp chats between Aryan and others allegedly hinting at him consuming and procuring drugs. Desai said that there were no WhatsApp chats on the basis of which the NDPS court rejected Aryan’s bail application the other day. “As far as Whatsapp chats are concerned, it is abundantly clear that there were no WhatsApp chats to support the conspiracy theory. As a part of this case, what was argued was WhatsApp chats which were 3 months before, one month before, etc,” he told the court.

Concluding argument: While ending his arguments against the NCB and seeking bail for both Aryan and Arbaaz, Amit Desai said that his clients have the right to get bail and that doesn’t mean that they would stop cooperating with the NCB for further investigation in the case. “Bail should be granted and we will all be available for the investigation as and when called,” he told the court.

(Information Source: India.com)