NCB
NCB
Litigation News

Illegal drug trafficking and financing or mere drug consumption: Why NDPS Court rejected Showik and Rhea Chakraborty bail plea [Read Order]

The NDPS case emerged following the unnatural death of Sushant Singh Rajput, with whom Rhea had a live-in relationship, an aspect noted in the court's order as well while restating the prosecution's version of events.

Meera Emmanuel

"The investigation is at preliminary stage and if the accused is released on bail then s/he will tamper the prosecution evidence", reasoned the Special NDPS Court while rejecting the bail pleas preferred by Rhea Chakraborty and her brother, Showik Chakraborty, both of whom have been accused of having being involved in the procurement of drugs for the late actor, Sushant Singh Rajput.

Whereas the bail pleas were rejected on Friday, the detailed orders passed by Additional Sessions Judge GB Gurao were issued on Monday, September 14.

It is the prosecution's case that Showik Chakraborty had procured drugs for Sushant Singh Rajput, sometimes on the instructions of his sister, Rhea.

Rhea Chakraborty is accused of having been aware of the drug procurement for Sushant, and further, it is alleged that some of the payments made for the drugs were also using Rhea's credit card.

Pertinently, both Rhea and Showik have been accused of illicit drug trafficking under Section 27A of the NDPS Act, in respect of which the Court noted that there was an embargo on the grant of bail under Section 37 of the Act unless there are reasonable grounds to believe that accused is not guilty after having heard the Public Prosecutor.

On this count, the NDPS court has taken a disfavourable view and found that it is not possible to release Rhea and Showik on bail. The orders further give the following reasons:

  • There is an embargo on the grant of bail to those accused of an offence under Section 19 or Sections 24 or 27A of the NDPS Act of involving drugs of commercial quantity.

  • Under Section 27A (Punishment for financing illicit traffic and harbouring offenders) of the NDPS Act, no particular quantity of the drug is required to prove the offence.

  • There is a bar under Section 37 of NDPS Act to release the accused (both Rhea and Showik) on bail.

  • When the investigation is at a preliminary stage, it can not be said that Rhea's/ Showik's statement regarding her alleged involvement in paying for the drugs and drug procurement is forcefully recorded.

  • The investigation is at a preliminary stage, therefore, from the available record, it can not be said that there are no reasonable grounds to connect Rhea to the case.

  • If the accused are released on bail then they would alert people and destroy the evidence.

  • There is a possibility of tampering with evidence if the accused are released on bail.

Charges were levelled against Rhea and Showik Chakraborty and several others under the Narcotics, Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, 1985 recently.

The NDPS case emerged following the unnatural death of Sushant Singh Rajput, with whom Rhea had a live-in relationship, an aspect noted in the NDPS court's order as well while restating the prosecution's version of events.

Amid the national limelight on the probe into Rajput's death, in relation to which Rhea has been named in the CBI's FIR, this NDPS case has also assumed sensational overtones.

Both Rhea and Showik Chakraborty were represented by Advocate Satish Maneshinde before the NDPS Court.

Why did NCB arrest Rhea Chakraborty?

Read the orders:

Rhea Chakraborty bail rejection order.pdf
Preview
Showik Indarjit Chakraborty vs The Union of India.pdf
Preview
Bar and Bench - Indian Legal news
www.barandbench.com