Thursday, 08 October 2020 | TN Raghunatha | Mumbai
The Bombay High Court on Wednesday granted a conditional bail to accused actress Rhea Chakraborty in the Sushant Singh Rajput death-related drug case, after holding that there were no grounds to believe that she committed any offence involving commercial quantity of contraband and dismissing the special court’s observation that if released on bail she might alert others and have the evidence destroyed by them.
Hours after the High Court granted her bail, Rhea walked out from the Byaculla women’s jail on Wednesday and drove back to her Juhu residence in the full media glare and amid tight police security.
Nearly a month after she was arrested in the Sushant death-related drug case, Justice SV Kotwal of the High Court granted bail to Rhea on a personal bond for Rs 1 lakh with “one or two sureties” for the same amount and conditions like she would deposit her passport with the Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) and not leave the country without permission from the special court and she would present herself for an attendance once in a month for the next six months.
The High Court also granted bail to the actor’s housekeeper Dipesh Sawant and house manager Samuel Miranda on a surety of Rs 50,000 each in cash. Justice Kotwal, however, rejected the bail plea of Rhea’s brother Showik Chakraborty after noting he is part of a chain of drug dealers.
The HC said, “The material gathered so far shows that the applicant (Showik) was not only knowing many drug dealers, but, he was (also) in touch with them and was actually transacting with them. Thus, he is part of a chain of drug dealers. At this stage, the investigating agency has sufficient material to show that he is a part of a chain of drug dealers engaged in illicit traffic of drugs”.
Justice Kotwal did not entertain a plea by Additional Solicitor General Anil C Singh that the bail order be stayed for one week to facilitate him to move the Supreme Court. “I have imposed sufficiently stringent conditions on the applicant. Some further conditions can be imposed for a limited period to take care of the request made by learned ASG though I am not inclined to grant stay to the order. If finally the order is set aside and the bail is cancelled, the applicant will be available for being arrested again,” the Judge noted.
In what came as a snub to the NCB which is investigating the Sushant death-related drug case, Justice Kotwal observed: “The investigation did not reveal any recovery either from the applicant or from the house of Sushant Singh Rajput. It is their own case that the drugs were already consumed and hence there was no recovery. In that case, there is nothing at this stage to show that the applicant had committed any offence involving commercial quantity of contraband”.
“The material at the highest shows that she has committed an offence involving contraband, but, the crucial element of incurring rigours of Section 37 in respect of commercial quantity is missing. Therefore, I am satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the applicant is not guilty of any offence punishable under Sections 19, 24 or 27A or any other offence involving commercial quantity,” the Judge noted.
“There are no other criminal antecedents against her. She is not part of the chain of drug dealers. She has not forwarded the drugs allegedly procured by her to somebody else to earn monetary or 66 / 70 67 1.3-BA-st-2386-2020 other benefits. Since she has no criminal antecedents, there are reasonable grounds for believing that she is not likely to commit any offence while on bail,” Justice Kotwal observed, while granting bail to Rhea.
A day after the special court extended Rhea’s custody till October 20, the High Court dismissed the special court’s observation that if released on bail, she might alert others and have the evidence destroyed by them.
“The learned Special Judge has observed that the applicant may alert others and evidence can be destroyed by them. There is no basis for such observation. It is also important to note that when the applicant was produced before the court for her first remand, the investigating agency did not seek her custody. That means, they are satisfied with her interrogation and she had cooperated in that investigation,” the HC Judge noted.
Welcoming the High Court’s order granting bail to Rhea, her lawyer Satish Maneshinde said: “Truth and justice have prevailed and ultimately the submissions on facts and law have been accepted by Justice Sarang V Kotwal”.
“The arrest and custody of Rhea was totally unwarranted and beyond the reach of law. The hounding and witch hunt by three Central agencies — the CBI , ED and NCB — of Rhea should come to and end. We remain committed to truth. Satyamev Jayate,” Maneshinde said.
It may be recalled that Rhea was arrested on September 8, after 19-long hours of grilling carried out during a span of three days. Her brother Showik had been arrested five days earlier.
Rhea, Showik and other accused in the Sushant death-related drug case had moved the High Court after the Special Court had rejected their bail applications on September 11.
During the questioning, Rhea reportedly admitted that she had procured drugs for Sushant through her currently arrested brother Showik Chakraborty, that she had acknowledged that she knew about Samuel purchasing drugs for the actor from drug peddler Zaid Vilatra and that she had accepted that she had accepted drug-related WhatsApp chats between her and others.
On her part, Rhea has however retracted the confessional statement recorded by the NCB ahead of her arrest.
After hearing both the sides, the Bombay High Court had on September 29 reserved its order on the bail applications of accused actress Rhea Chakraborty, her brother Showik and others in the Sushant Singh Rajput death-related drug case, after observing that its verdict would have “wide reach repercussions” and that it would pass separate orders in all matters.
After hearing all the sides, Justice SV Kotwal of the Bombay High Court had said: “Arguments on the matter are closed. The matter is now reserved for orders. Due to voluminous proceedings, the order may take some time”.
“This judgment has wide reach and repercussions. I will try to write separate orders in all matters, but I might end up attributing Sayyed’s arguments of Sayyed (advocate for co-accused Abel Basit Parihar to (Satish) Maneshinde. Please excuse me for that,” the Judge had noted.
During the hearing before the High Court, advocate Satish Maneshinde had among other things argued for the bail applicants that the NCB had no jurisdiction to handle the case after the Supreme Court directed the CBI to investigate the cases relating to Sushant’s death.
The NCB had told the High Court that the Supreme Court has directed the CBI to take over investigation, if any new case was registered “on the death of Sushant Singh Rajput and the surrounding circumstances of his unnatural death” and the direction “was not with respect to the present case” registered under provisions of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.
“The present applicant (Rhea) is a prominent member of the supply chain of drugs and majorly she is handling finance also…and used to manage finance for drug procurement along with Sushant Singh Rajput,” the NCB had said in its affidavit opposing Rhea’s bail application.
