HEARING 1 (OCT 3, DAY 2): Mumbai's Esplanade Court sends Aryan Khan to one-day Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) remand till Oct 4; his lawyer asked to file bail before regular court

HEARING 2 (OCT 4, DAY 3): Aryan and co-accused sent to NCB custody till Oct 7, after prosecution asks for extension of NCB remand for further questioning and establishing links with drug peddlers

HEARING 3 (OCT 7, DAY 6): Court denies NCB’s request for further extension of custody; sends Aryan to judicial custody for 14 days, listing the hearing of bail application the following day

HEARING 4 (OCT 8, DAY 7): Court denies bail to Aryan as “not maintainable" (as court did not have jurisdiction over it)

HEARING 5 (OCT 11, DAY 10): Special NDPS Court grants NCB's request for more time to prepare response to Aryan's bail application

--------------------------------

OCT 3: (DAY 2): The Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) formally arrested Aryan Khan and seven others in connection with the drugs raid carried out on a Mumbai-Goa cruise. The matter was heard by Holiday Magistrate R K Rajebhosale. The court sent Aryan to one-day NCB remand (till Oct 4), asking his lawyer to file for bail before regular court.

“My client was invited by the organisers. He had no boarding pass. Nothing was found with him. His mobile instrument was examined. Nothing was found in subsequent tests”

– Satish Maneshinde, Aryan’s Khan’s lawyer

“I am seeking a humble 2-day reasonable custody. NCB has apprehended a supply person so NCB needs to find out the contact link. There is a link shown through WhatsApp chats. On the basis of interrogation, NCB is conducting a new raid operation, we want to confront them with each other”

– Special Public Prosecutor Advait Sethna for the NCB

OCT 4 (DAY 3): In the bail hearing at Mumbai’s Esplanade Court, Aryan’s lawyer argued that since no drugs were found on him, he cannot be roped in with seizure. The prosecution asked for extension of NCB remand for further questioning and establishing links with drug peddlers. The court sent Aryan and co-accused to NCB custody till October 7

“The panchnama does not indicate anything seized from me except my mobile. My friend was arrested because he had 6 grams of charas, with which I was not connected to. The drugs that have been seized as mentioned in the remand have not been seized from any one of us. I cannot be roped in with seizure”

– Aryan Khan’s statement, as read by his lawyer Satish Maneshinde

Just because he was not found in possession doesn’t make him innocent. There is incriminating material found through WhatsApp chats with drug peddlers. There is investigation about the payment modes and the several codes which were used. All the accused need to be confronted. The international transactions need to be investigated. The person may not be found with commercial quantity but then custody is required to find out the chain or links. Where is the financing made, who is the source, all this needs to be found out”

– Additional Solicitor General Anil Singh, who appeared for the NCB

“All the offences under NDPS are non-bailable. Therefore, the question of bailable or non-bailable does not arise. What is essential to consider is whether the custody is to be given or not. The co-accused possess intermediate contraband. The accused accompanied them. Investigation is of prime importance. It will be essential for prosecution and the accused to prove is innocent. NCB remand till Oct 7, 2021” – Court

OCT 7 (DAY 6): Aryan’s defence team applied for bail, arguing that no further questioning was done by the NCB and there was no need for extension of custody. The prosecution again asked for extension. The court denied NCB’s request and sent Aryan to judicial custody for 14 days, listing the hearing of bail application the following day. Since jail authorities do not admit accused post 6pm without COVID report, the NCB was asked to keep the accused in their custody for the time period.

“As far as this case is concerned, on the first day, I readily agreed for one more day of remand, thinking there will be some development. Apart from some more arrests, nothing more has happened. As far as my interrogation that has taken place, it was connected to my stay abroad. Nothing else has been questioned. They have not interrogated me for two nights. Why is custodial interrogation required now? If NCB has not managed to unearth any controversy so far, then what are they going to do now?”

– Satish Maneshinde, appearing for Aryan Khan

“In this case, several recoveries have been made from others as suppliers. Another attempt will be made today to contact more suspects as has been made for other accused. Further on the basis of enquiry, considering the seriousness of the crime, custody is required”

– ASG Anil Singh, who appeared for the NCB

“Simply remanding the accused to NCB custody without reason is cogent ground for violating liberty. No further custodial interrogation of Aryan Khan required as sufficient time and opportunity was granted to the NCB for investigation. Hence Aryan Khan and others are remanded to judicial custody. The zonal director is requested to keep the accused in NCB as jail authorities do not admit the accused post 6 pm without COVID report. So, they may be remanded with NCB” – Court

OCT 8 (DAY 7): At the bail hearing at Mumbai's Esplanade Court, the prosecution argued that the court could not hear Aryan’s (and others’) bail applications as it did not have jurisdiction over that.

“I am a 23-year-old with no prior antecedents. Apart from questioning on day 1 nothing else has happened after that. In the last 5 days nothing has emerged. I am from a respectable family, my parents, siblings are here. I hold an Indian passport. I have roots in the society, cannot abscond”

– Aryan Khan’s statement, as read by his lawyer Satish Maneshinde

“We are not opposing their right to seek bail or application to seek bail. What I am opposing is the right to claim bail in this court. I am just saying this application is not maintainable here because there is a Special NCB court where they can approach for bail”

– ASG Anil Singh, appearing for the NCB

Judge denied bail to Aryan Khan and others as “not maintainable before us and hence rejected”. As per law, under the NDPS Act, the trial has to be conducted by the Special Court for NDPS. But this bail application, at the very first instance, was filed in the court of the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (CMM). The state raised an objection that since under NDPS Act, the jurisdiction is with the special NDPS Court, a bail application before the CMM is not maintainable as it lacks jurisdiction. Only the special judge can grant bail in this case. The court ruled the objection valid.

OCT 11 (DAY 10): Bail applications of Aryan Khan, Arbaaz Merchantt, Munmun Dhamecha and other accused were heard by a Special NDPS Court. The NCB asked for more time to prepare responses and the court granted them two days to respond to the accused’s application.

“Bail does not stop investigation. But the man has been in for a week. After looking at the case diary and other persons, it was concluded that police custody is not required. He has spent 7 days in custody. There is nothing with him, no other material. This is a question of someone’s personal liberty. Why should my liberty be kept for administrative reasons of the NCB?”

– Advocate Amit Desai, appearing for Aryan Khan

“We will require time to file replies. Normally, NCB takes a week to file a reply. The facts that they have been saying are not correct facts. The picture is not as rosy as it seems. We will even place on record the investigation papers. Give me at least 2-3 days”

- SPP A M Chimalker, appearing for NCB

The Court posted the matter for consideration on October 13, Wednesday, after NCB sought time to file its response