The Bombay High Court has granted former Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) Mumbai zonal director Sameer Wankhede interim protection until Monday, and directed him to appear before the CBI on Saturday, for investigation.

Wankhede was present during the court proceedings, and senior advocate Rizwan Merchant represented him, making extensive arguments about the alleged misuse of power. Merchant emphasized that Wankhede, a celebrated IRS officer of the Indian government, has been wrongly implicated in the case. He further contended that the CBI does not have jurisdiction to register the case and referred to Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, which imposes a time limit of four months for completing the inquiry from the date of registration of the main offense. In the Cordelia case, the offense was registered on October 3, 2021, and more than two years have passed since then, with the FIR only being registered recently.

The public prosecutor representing the CBI failed to provide a satisfactory response to these arguments. However, he mentioned that the government's approval was received on May 11, and the FIR was registered accordingly, bringing the CBI into the picture. When questioned by the court if this was the official stance of the CBI, the public prosecutor said that he will file a reply.

The court passed order saying, prima facie there is a legal bar under 17A of the PC Act and asked CBI to not to take any coercive action till Monday and asked Wankhede to appear before them on Saturday.

Merchant requested relief from arrest, while the CBI argued granting him relief would hinder the ongoing investigation, particularly considering his alleged lack of cooperation. The CBI pointed out that Wankhede failed to comply with the summons issued for his appearance on May 18. The CBI stated that if he cooperates, they would not arrest him. However, the CBI refused to provide assurance, raising the question of what would happen if he did not cooperate.

Wankhede, in his writ petition, has made a huge claim saying Aryan Khan's name was removed at the last minute before filing the charge sheet and the original draft prepared by legal advisors of the NCB had his name.

Wankhede in his petition submitted that whilst the investigation concluded and a draft complaint was prepared by the Department Legal Advisor (DLA) Japan Babu, whereby charges were proposed against Aryan Khan, and various sections were included in it, the said draft complaint never came to be filed on record. In fact, it was replaced with a separate draft complaint prepared from outside, a fact also confirmed by the DLA on a telephone call with the petitioner on June 2, 2022 between 10:48 PM and 10:58 PM. "The petitioner (Wankhede) crave leave to refer and rely upon the recordings of the telephone calls that the Petitioner had with the DLA on 2nd June 2022," the petition reads

Merchant said that Wankhede will cooperate but CBI should probe where the original draft is and why the same is being destroyed and they should also investigate DDG Gyaneshwar Singh who was passing all the order at the time of Aryan Khan's arrest. "I have full faith in the judiciary and the CBI as well that I will get justice," Wankhede said.