Seven Arguments Made on Behalf of Aryan Khan in Court During His Bail Hearing

Aryan Khan and seven others have been sent to a 14-day judicial custody in the Mumbai Cruise raid case.

2 min read
<div class="paragraphs"><p>Shah Rukh Khan's son Aryan Khan was denied bail by a court on Friday, 8 October.</p></div>

A Mumbai court, on Friday, rejected the bail applications for Aryan Khan and others in the Mumbai cruise raid. The court noted that the applications were non- maintainable. On Thursday, a Court had sent Aryan and the others to a 14-day judicial custody. It rejected further extension of NCB custody. Aryan and others were transferred to Mumbai's Arthur Road and Byculla Jails on Friday, 8 October.

Aryan, Arbaaz Merchantt, Munmun Dhamecha and others were arrested by the Narcotics Control Bureau following a raid onboard a luxury cruise off the coast of Mumbai.

Here are some arguments made on behalf of Aryan in court during his bail hearing on Friday:

  • Advocate Satish Maneshinde, appearing for Aryan Khan, argued that Aryan isn't accused of consumption, which is punishable under Section 27 of the NDPS Act. Thus, the embargo on grant of bail under Section 37 of the Act will not apply to Aryan. "There is no material (against me), even in messages," Aryan stated in his bail plea.

  • Aryan, through Maneshinde further said, "am a 23-year-old with no prior antecedents. I happen to be from Bollywood. I went on an invitation, refused when asked if I have drugs…Data from my mobile has been retrieved and sent for forensics. I have been found with nothing, not an ounce but so much capital is being made of it".

  • Maneshinde cited the judgment in Harsh Shailesh Shah vs State of Maharashtra case, wherein the Bombay High Court, while adopting the reformative approach for the two first-time offenders, granted bail in a case for possession and consumption of drugs.

  • In this case, it was held that prima facie purchasing drugs for another person at a party would not make one a drug peddler to attract Section 37 for bail under the NDPS Act.

  • Maneshinde added that since Aryan has an Indian passport, he isn't going to abscond. "I have parents and a family here. I have an Indian passport and I am not going to abscond. There is no question of tampering. I should be granted bail", read Aryan's statement.

  • Reacting to the ASG's arguments that Aryan hails from an influential family, and thus there can be a case of tampering Aryan (through Maneshinde) responded, "Even if they want to say I will tamper with evidence, they should come with a positive case of how I will do it. Just bald allegations! Just because I come from an affluent family doesn't mean I'll tamper with evidence. What influence have I used? I am suffering from the last six days".

  • "Search and seizure can not be cited just to lock me (Aryan) up in the jail. The normal tendency of the court is to grant bail. There is an accusation, there is no material. I was abroad when those chats happened" Maneshinde told the Court.

(At The Quint, we are answerable only to our audience. Play an active role in shaping our journalism by becoming a member. Because the truth is worth it.)

Stay Updated

Subscribe To Our Daily Newsletter And Get News Delivered Straight To Your Inbox.

Join over 120,000 subscribers!