Showing posts with label Prashant Bhushan. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Prashant Bhushan. Show all posts
Aryan Khan case: Supreme Court should step in, do something about WhatsApp evidence, say lawyers
8:55 AM
As NCB successfully argues for denial of bail to Aryan Khan, leading advocates seek the intervention of higher judiciary when it comes to using personal chats as evidence
Faizan Khan, Diwakar Sharma (MID-DAY; October 21, 2021)
The NCB’s (Narcotics Control Bureau) heavy reliance on WhatsApp messages in a special NDPS court to oppose bail to Aryan Khan and others has created an uproar in the legal fraternity, which is looking at it as massive judicial indiscipline, and has urged the Supreme Court to take suo motu cognisance. The order of the special NDPS court rejects the bail application of Aryan Khan merely on the basis of WhatsApp chats, allegedly indicating that he is part of a drug network.
The Narcotics Control Bureau, in the case of Rhea and Showik Chakraborty also relied on the WhatsApp chats though no drugs were found on them. The NCB had said they were part of an illicit drug network and charged them under the stringent Section of NDPS Act 27A where the maximum punishment is 20 years. The Bombay High Court, while granting bail to Rhea Chakraborty, said that she was not part of a drug chain while Showik was. Now something similar is happening in the case of Aryan Khan, the only difference being that he was booked by NCB only for consumption.
‘Misinterpreted piece of evidence’
A senior lawyer of the Bombay HC, Rizwan Merchant said, “It is very unfortunate that the entire order of rejection of bail to Aryan seems to have been based on material which was nowhere in existence, when NCB, on Day 1 charged him with the 'bailable offence' of consumption. They never alleged that he was part of a conspiracy with others for consumption. If a consumer buys a drug for consumption, he doesn’t verify the amount available with the seller, whether he is with a small or commercial quantity.”
He further added, “The reliance on WhatsApp chats also seems to be a subsequently trumped up and misconstrued and misinterpreted piece of evidence being relied upon by NCB, to only to prejudice the mind of the court, and to bring Aryan within the network of traffickers, so that he doesn’t get the advantage of being required to be treated separately as a consumer, which is the very objective of the NDPS Act while dealing with consumers.”
‘Massive judicial indiscipline’
Another lawyer who is now an IPS officer, Isha Singh, also spoke about the order saying that it was massive judicial indiscipline on part of the lower court and a violation of the Supreme Court. “The SC has ruled that WhatsApp chats don’t have any evidential value. They can be used during the trial. But using WhatsApp chats in pre-trial incarceration goes against the order of the SC, so the lower courts are violating the order of the SC. It means that someone presumes allegiance to the NCB rather than the SC. That’s why I say that this is an act of judicial indiscipline and what is happening is alarming. The SC needs to take suo motu cognizance of this judicial indiscipline occurring in Mumbai.”
“Assuming without admitting that there is a reference to Aryan’s chat with another person discussing drugs, what evidence has NCB produced to suggest even remotely that the other person is a drug trafficker? Further assuming that the other side is a drug trafficker, what’s the evidence to suggest that the chat was for trafficking and not for consumption. The finding of the court that Aryan seems to be a regular consumer doesn’t exclude him from the category of ‘consumers’ and consequently entitled to be treated differently as provided in the statute, with the option of even being granted immunity from prosecution under 64A of the NDPS Act,” Merchant said.
Senior advocate Prashant Bhushan said on Twitter, “No drugs found in possession of Aryan Khan. In any case, alleged offence is punishable with max 1 year jail. Yet no bail to him even after 2 weeks! Absurd! Seems that many judges have no idea of the right to personal liberty & the principles of bail.”
A senior lawyer from the Supreme Court, and Rajya Sabha member Kapil Sibal said, “I personally think that Aryan had not consumed any drug that point in time, he was not in possession of any drug. The fact that somebody else was in possession of drugs does not make him liable.” “WhatsApp messages are no proof of dealing in drugs; in what circumstances these messages are written, to whom they are written can be looked at, but certainly this arrest onboard the vessel was, according to me, unholy and unjustified,” Sibal added.
‘Only recourse to set order aside’
“It’s a judicial order. The only recourse is to set it aside, which can be done by a superior court. Some may like it, many may not, but as long as it’s on record, it will be treated as a precedent. And, I feel it must be challenged to set the record straight. WhatsApp chats, as held by the Supreme Court, have no evidential value,” said Dr Sujay Kantawala, a senior lawyer. Another lawyer felt Aryan has been targetted just because he is Shah Rukh Khan’s son.
“The hon’ble court should have considered Aryan’s bail on merit based on the probative evidence available, instead of taking it on sketchy assumption created by NCB. From the inception the boy has been made a target just because he is the son of Shah Rukh Khan. The prefatory investigation has not been fair as we are seeing. It’s a bailable offence that the department is trying to shape as non-bailable by giving the story of international link to the case. It’s most unfortunate that the matter has been given a political shape,” said Jaikush Hoon, a senior lawyer with the SC.
Income Tax department searches premises of Anurag Kashyap & Taapsee Pannu; opposition leaders cry foul
8:33 AM
Vijay V Singh (THE TIMES OF INDIA; March 4, 2021)
Mumbai: The Income Tax department on Wednesday searched the premises of director Anurag Kashyap, actor Taapsee Pannu, film production houses Phantom Films (now dissolved), Reliance Entertainment, and talent management firms Exceed Entertainment and KWAN Talent Management Agency for alleged tax evasion.
I-T officials also reportedly questioned Kashyap and Pannu in Pune where they were shooting for a film. The department is examining the last few years’ financial records of these firms and individuals, said a senior I-T officer.
Political leaders alleged the duo was targeted by the I-T department for criticising the central government’s policies. NCP minister Nawab Malik said the Centre was suppressing their voices through such action, while RJD’s Tejashwi Yadav tweeted that the government “is chasing social activists, journalists & artists to threaten them against calling spade a spade”.
------------------------
Vijay V Singh (THE TIMES OF INDIA; March 4, 2021)
Among the voices that claimed that filmmaker Anurag Kashyap and actress Taapsee Pannu have been ‘targeted’ by the income-tax department for criticising the central government’s policies was that of activist-lawyer Prashant Bhushan. “Filmmaker Anurag Kashyap, Actor Taapsee Pannu Face Income Tax Raids. BJP’S A team at work to harass, intimidate & silence those who don't fall in line. India has never seen such malafide use of IT dept, ED, NIA, police etc,” Bhushan tweeted on Wednesday.
Income-tax officials, however, claimed that one should not “connect the searches with any other reason”. They said they had found discrepancies in the income earned by these firms/individuals and their returns filed with the department that indicates tax evasion.
The officials collected digital records and files during the searches at film production houses Phantom Films (now dissolved) and Reliance Entertainment, talent management firms Exceed Entertainment and KWAN Talent Management Agency, as well as Kashyap and Pannu.
Commissioner of Income Tax and CBDT spokesperson Surabhi Ahluwalia confirmed the searches without disclosing any names, adding that the action was related to tax evasion.
Phantom Films was dissolved two years ago after one of its promoters faced sexual harassment charges from a former employee.
A Reliance spokesperson said that Reliance Entertainment premises were searched because of its past association with Phantom Films and they are not facing any scrutiny. I-T officials searched the premises of people connected with the company including Kashyap, Vikas Bahl and Madhu Mantena.
Phantom Films was co-producer of ‘Manmarziyaan’ which was directed by Kashyap and featured Pannu. Kashyap, along with Reliance Entertainment, had also produced another Pannu-starrer film ‘Saand Ki Aankh’.
------------------------
While officials say the Income Tax raid was in connection with the alleged misdeeds of the erstwhile Phantom Films, the Opposition insists this is a witch hunt
MID-DAY (March 4, 2021)
The Income Tax Department on Wednesday raided premises linked to actor Taapsee Pannu, filmmaker Anurag Kashyap and the promoters of his now-dissolved production house — Phantom Films. Officials said the searches were part of a tax evasion probe against Phantom Films. NCP leader Nawab Malik said the raids were an attempt to suppress the voices of those speaking against the Narendra Modi-led government.
The I-T department searches were carried out across 30 locations in Mumbai and Pune, also covered Reliance Entertainment group CEO Shibhasish Sarkar and some executives of celebrity and talent management company KWAN, officers said. The raids began in the morning and were continuing till late evening.
The action is part of a probe against Phantom Films, which was dissolved in 2018, and its then promoters Kashyap, director-producer Vikramaditya Motwane, producer Vikas Bahl and producer-distributor Madhu Mantena.
Gathering more evidence
The I-T department sources said some inter-linked transactions between the entities raided are under the scanner of the department. The raids, they added, are aimed at gathering more evidence to further investigate the tax evasion allegations against them.
The business transactions of films made under the banner of Phantom Films, founded in 2011, are also being probed, the sources said. The searches against Mantena are being carried out in context of his links with KWAN, of which he is a co-promoter.
Both are outspoken
Founded in 2011, his production house Phantom Films produced films such as “Lootera”, “Queen”, “Ugly”, “NH 10”, “Masaan” and “Udta Punjab”. Both Kashyap and Pannu, who worked together in the 2018 film Manmarziyaan and are now collaborating for film Dobaara, are known to be outspoken about their views on a range of issues.
Responding to a question at a press conference in Delhi, Union minister Prakash Javadekar rejected allegations that the raids against Kashyap and Pannu were linked to their comments, which are seen at times critical of the BJP.
“This is too much,” he said of the question. “Probe agencies undertake investigations based on credible information and the matter later goes to courts as well,” he added.
In Maharashtra, the debate intensified with state minister and NCP leader Nawab Malik describing the searches as an attempt to suppress the voices of those who speak against the Narendra Modi-led government.
“Central agencies like ED, CBI, and Income Tax are being used to target those who take an anti-government stand and speak against the policies of the regime,” the minister told reporters in Mumbai.
“The premises of Anurag Kashyap and Pannu have been raided. Both were raising their voices against the Modi government,” he said.
‘Taapsee’s last tweet’
Pannu’s last tweet was on March 1, when she spoke on the Supreme Court asking a man accused of repeated rape whether he was willing to marry the 18-year-old victim. The actor, 33, put out a strong-worded post on the matter. Kashyap, who had visited JNU and Shaheen Bagh during the anti-CAA protests last year and is known to be equally outspoken, has been quiet on Twitter of late except for occasional retweeting.
The 48-year-old filmmaker, one of the most prominent new directors in Hindi cinema, is the man behind “Black Friday”, “Dev D” and the two-part crime saga “Gangs Of Wasseypur”.
Attorney General turns down ‘contempt of SC’ plea against Swara Bhasker
8:14 AM
Dhananjay Mahapatra (THE TIMES OF INDIA; August 24, 2020)
New Delhi: After pleading for no punishment to convicted contemnor Prashant Bhushan, attorney general for India K K Venugopal on Sunday refused to permit filing of a contempt petition against actor Swara Bhasker for her allegedly derogatory comments against the Supreme Court on the Ayodhya verdict.
Consent of the AG or the solicitor general is needed to initiate contempt proceedings against anyone. Venugopal told TOI, “I declined consent as there is no attack on the SC. It is mere innuendo. Initiating contempt proceedings would mean giving more credence to her statement, which is not needed.”
On the petition against Bhasker, the AG said, “The SC need not be extra sensitive. If we start contempt proceedings, it unnecessarily gives publicity to the wrong remarks. In this case, her ire was more against the government and the comments against the SC were mere innuendoes.”
Venugopal himself had initiated contempt proceedings against Bhushan for accusing the government of forging documents in the CBI director’s appointment and later on sought its withdrawal after the lawyer regretted the mistake on his part and withdrew the allegations. On the petition against Bhasker, the AG said, “I do not want the Supreme Court to be embroiled in another controversy when one (against Bhushan) is already attracting a lot of adverse public reaction.”
“The SC should not be jumping to conclusions about someone scandalising the court and drawing up contempt proceedings when foreign jurisdictions have gradually discarded contempt for scandalising the courts through mere criticism.”
Bhasker had said, “We are living in a country where the Supreme Court states in a judgment that demolition of Babri Masjid was unlawful and in the same judgment rewards the same people who brought down the mosque.” One Usha Shetty had termed Bhasker’s statement contemptuous and sought the AG’s permission to initiate contempt proceedings against her.
Sources told TOI that Shetty has now moved the petition before solicitor general Tushar Mehta for permission. It is not clear in the Contempt of Court Act whether a person intending to initiate contempt proceedings against another could seek permission from the SG after the same was declined by the AG.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)