Avin Sahu and Manish Rajgadiya, who had been granted bail by a special court under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act on Tuesday in the cruise drugs bust case, walked out of the Arthur Road jail on Wednesday evening.
Judge VV Patil, who had upheld the conspiracy angle when it came to Aryan Khan’s case and said that further investigation was needed, accepted defence advocate Sana Khan’s arguments that Sahu’s case was different from that of Khan.
The special court in its detailed order, made available on Wednesday, said that the “aspect of proving the conspiracy which deals with depth is required to be considered only at the time of trial.”
However, the court added that the NCB had “failed to produce on record any evidence to show that he [Sahu] was either in contact with any of the accused or that in any way he is connected with the co-accused.”
“There were no WhatsApp chats, no connection with any of the accused. He has not disclosed names of any accused or peddlers. He has no connection with drug peddlers. There is absolutely no evidence against Sahu regarding conspiracy,” his lawyer, Sana Khan, said.
Also Read: ‘No conspiracy proof, no drugs found’: 5 top arguments in Bombay HC for Aryan Khan’s bail
The special NDPS Act court further added that the NCB had failed to “point out any circumstances during argument which will show the nexus of the Sahu with any co-accused to prima facie make out the ingredients of the conspiracy. Merely because applicant was present on the cruise, he can not be said to be acted in conspiracy with co-accused”.
The court refused to apply the same analogy”, with which Aryan Khan, Arbaaz Merchantt and Munmun Dhamecha’s bail applications were rejected, to Sahu’s case.
While nothing was recovered from Sahu, 2.4 grams ganja was allegedly recovered from Rajgadiya. The court went through the arguments put forth by advocate Taraq Sayyad and Ajay Dubey, apart from that of prosecution, and said that prosecution had “failed to point out any circumstances during argument which will show the nexus of the applicant with any co-accused to prima facie make out the ingredients of the conspiracy.”
Judge Patil said, “Merely because some contraband was allegedly recovered from the applicant, he cannot be said to be acted in conspiracy with co-accused.”
Dubey and Sayyad had pointed out that the 2.4 grams of contraband was recovered by the NCB officials from the security guard and not from Rajgadiya. The court said, “So far as in respect of recovery is concerned, panchnama states that contraband was handed over to the NCB officers by security officer. Thus, there is prima facie no cogent evidence on record regarding recovery of contraband from the applicant.”
Also read: NCB’s vigilance dept to quiz Sameer Wankhede over ‘extortion’ charge on WednesdayInternet Explorer Channel Network