logo
Breaking News
Tip Off

Rhea Chakraborty’s Lawyer Argues Against Jurisdiction Of NCB, Claims SC Order Only Empowers CBI Investigation

Rhea Chakraborty NCB, CBI ssr
In the recent developments in the Sushant Singh Rajput case, bail applications of Bollywood actress Rhea Chakraborty and brother Showik Chakraborty and other accused will be heard by the Bombay High Court on September 29, 2020, i.e. Tuesday. The others accused, namely involves Samuel Miranda, Dipesh Sawant, and Abdel Parihar.

The video conferencing bail application of the Chakraborty siblings was heard by Hon’ble Justice Sarang Kotwal. The learned counsel for the Narcotics Control Bureau, Additional Solicitor General Anil Singh has stated that no copy of the bail applications was served to him. Counsel for the Chakraborty’s, Advocate Satish Maneshinde negated the statement saying the bail application has been served twice. However, it can be served again.

In retort, the ASG Singh has sought time from the court to read through the applications. He has also asked for the matter to be listed with the bail applications of the others accused. “Rhea and Showik have been booked by the NCB under various sections of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, 1985 including stringent sections pertaining to procurement of drugs, and financing of illicit trafficking of contrabands.” 

The jurisdiction of the NCB’s investigation has been challenged by Advocate Maneshinde. He has also stated that the Supreme Court has ordered the transfer of the investigation o the NCBI. The learned counsel for the Chakraborty’s further argued that the CBI is empowered to investigate the current matter under the NDPS Act, 1985

He has also submitted that taking 27 A of the Act of 1985 in question, “there is an embargo in terms of commercial quantity and small quantity”. 

Section 27 A of the NDPS Act, 1985 reads as, “Punishment for financing illicit traffic and harboring offenders. Whoever indulges in the financing, directly or indirectly, any of the activities specified in sub-clauses (i) to (v) of clause (viiia) of section 2 or harbors any person engaged in any of the aforementioned activities, shall be punishable with rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than ten years but which may extend to twenty years and shall also be liable to fine which shall not be less than one lakh rupees but which may extend to two lakh rupees: Provided that the court may, for reasons to be recorded in the judgment, impose a fine exceeding two lakh rupees”. 

He has also stated that the “embargo under Section 37 ” will be applicable in this instant case. Section 37 of the NDPS Act, 1985 reads as, “Offences to be cognizable and non-bailable.” 

Justice Kotwal has asked the counsels for all the accused along with ASG Anil Singh to argue on the matter justifying the applicability 27 A of the NDPS Act, 1985. Advocate Manashinde has been directed to serve the NCB again physically. With this regard, the court is to be apprised whether the offences charged against the applicants are bailable or not under the NDPS Act, 1985.

The matter has been deferred to be heard on September 29th, 2020 along with the bail applications of the others accused.

 


315 Views

Leave a Reply

Top
ad image