NCB misinterpreting WhatsApp chats, no connection with co-accused: Ten grounds on which Aryan Khan has sought bail

Aryan Khan, son of Bollywood actor Shahrukh Khan, has told the Bombay High Court that the Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) is misinterpreting his WhatsApp chats to implicate him in the cruise ship drug case and frame him for the offence of conspiracy under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (NDPS Act)..In the plea following the Sessions Court verdict denying him bail, Khan contended that the interpretation of the WhatsApp chats collected from his phone is wrong and unjustified.Further, Khan submitted that he has no connection with any of the co-accused arrested in the case except two of them - Arbaaz Merchant and Aachit Kumar - who had invited him to the party..Besides, Khan also challenged the conclusion of the Sessions Court that because he is an influential person, he might tamper with the evidence in the case. There is no presumption in law that merely because a person is influential, there is likelihood of him tampering with the evidence, Khan contended.Below are the major grounds raised by Khan in his plea..1. No communication with any party organisers, no communication about consumption of drugsKhan has submitted that there was no communication with Ameer Furniturewala or any of the organisers of the event on the cruise and that there was no discussion or conversation about a rave party or consumption of drugs, while on the cruise ship or otherwise..2. Arrest memo did not mention conspiracyKhan has contended that arrest memo accused him of contravention of Sections 8(c), 20(b), 27 read with Section 35 of the Act. However, the offence of conspiracy under Section 29 was added during remand. .3. No recovery from KhanNo contraband was recovered from Khan..4. No connection with co-accused, hence cannot be made liable for recoveries from othersKhan has categorically denied that he has any connection or contact with any of the co-accused arrested in the case except for Arbaaz Merchant and Aachit Kumar.Hence, recoveries from other co-accused cannot be used against Khan. The respondents are verily misleading courts by linking the applicant (Khan) with the other co-accused and to the recoveries made from such persons, it was submitted..5. No evidence of conspiracy between Aryan and MerchantAs regards his connection with Merchant, Khan said that there is no evidence showing any conspiracy between the two. What is required to prove conspiracy is the knowledge of the dominant object of conspiracy and an agreement to achieve the said dominant object, which are missing in the instant case, it was contended..6. WhatsApp chats misinterpreted by NCBOne of his primary contentions was that his WhatsApp chats are being misinterpreted by NCB. Whatsapp chats are ex-facie for a period prior to the incident for which the alleged secret information was received i.e the rave party on board the cruise liner Cordelia on October 2, 2021.By no stretch of imagination can those purported messages be linked to any conspiracy for which the secret information was received, Khan submitted. The interpretation of the WhatsApp messages is that of the investigating officer and such interpretation is unjustified and wrong, the plea said.Besides, as on date, neither the veracity nor accuracy of these chats have been established, the plea claimed..7. Section 37 not applicableSection 37 lays down stringent conditions for grant of bail in case of offences involving commercial quantity of drugs. In such a scenario, an accused cannot be released on bail if the public prosecutor opposes the bail.In such an event, bail can be granted only if the court is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accused is not guilty of such offence and that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail. Khan has contended that this bar will not apply to the present case.“This is case of no evidence at all, even if the court comes to the conclusion that offences under the NDPS act are non-bailable there is no evidence to charge the applicant for any offence under the Act,” the plea said..8. No material to show he will tamper with evidenceOne of the grounds on which Khan was denied bail by the Sessions Court was that he might tamper with evidence if released. However, Khan has opposed the same, stating that there is no presumption in law that merely because a person is influential, there is likelihood of tampering with the investigation.“It is necessary that there has to be a specific allegation in this regard and in the present case there is no material to back such allegation,” the plea said..9. False confessions in panchnama inadmissible as evidenceThe secret information received by NCB about Khan was obviously false as there was no recovery of any substance from him, the plea pointed out. The matter should have ended there, but instead the recovery from Arbaaz was sought to be connected with Khan. This was by means of a false confession recorded in the panchnama, which is inadmissible, Khan submitted..10. Reformative approachThe NDPS Act underwent certain amendments in 2001 to infuse a reformative approach into the Act, instead of a retributive approach. Hence, denying him bail would serve no purpose in this light.