Zaid Vilatra and Abdel Basit Parihar, the two defendants who had implicated Rhea Chakraborty’s brother and Sushant Singh Rajput’s house manager, Samuel Miranda, and the domestic helper Dipesh Swant, have retracted their statements given to the Narcotics Control Office (NCB).
The NCB had arrested Zaid Vilatra and Abdel Basit Parihar on August 3. They were taken into the custody of NCB. On Saturday, their lawyer Taraq Sayyed asked a Mumbai magistrate to release them on bail, insisting that statements made by them while in NCB custody should be ignored, as the investigating agency had twisted their minds. arm to both.
Also read: Rhea Chakraborty files a complaint against Sushant Singh Rajput’s sister, Priyanka Singh
“We filed applications when they were presented to the court, where they retracted the statements given before the NCB officers, and we sought bail for them. This is a bail offense. Furthermore, the amount of narcotic substance involved is small, which entitles the defendant to bail, ”said Taraq Sayyed.
However, the magistrate rejected his request for bail. Vilatra and Parihar filed a new request for bail on Saturday before a special court set up to try cases under the Law on Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances. The two defendants also told the NDPS judge that they had made their statements to the NCB under duress.
The NDPS special court has yet to rule on his application for bail. After the NCB insisted that it needed to question the two to build its case, the judge postponed the hearing and decided to resume the bail request hearing on Thursday.
Read also: Rhea Chakraborty returns to the Bureau of Narcotics for the second day of questioning
Vilatra and Parihar were arrested by the NCB in the ongoing investigation into allegations of drug use by the late actor Sushant Singh Rajput.
The agency had first arrested Abbas Ali Lakhani (21) with 46 grams of marijuana on August 28. According to information provided by Lakhani, his supplier Karn Arora was arrested with 13 grams of marijuana. Later, according to information provided by the two, NCB had arrested Vilatra and Parihar on August 3. NCB had claimed that Parihar had admitted to purchasing marijuana on the instructions of Rhea Chhakraborty’s brother, Showik, and had provided it to Samuel Miranda.
Attorneys say that once a defendant retracts his statement, its probative value becomes questionable and that the courts will have to examine various aspects. But this may not always be an automatic process and would depend on the particular circumstances of the case.
Rizwan Merchant, a prominent lawyer practicing criminal law, said: “Once the statement given by the defendant is withdrawn, the probative value of what is stated becomes questionable. The court will need to see independent evidence other than the statement that can support the prosecution’s case. In the case of Rajput, the conversation in an application can be investigated if it has independent corroboration. ”
Avdhut Chimalkar, a prominent lawyer who appeared as a special prosecutor in the case registered against the former zone director of the Office of Narcotics Control and senior IPS official, Saji Mohan, explained: “When the accused retracted the statement, the court You must examine various aspects that include the content. There are contents that are the exclusive knowledge of the accused, that not even the investigator could have imagined; in such circumstances, the retraction may not be accepted. In addition, the defendant gives a statement after his arrest and then retracts his statement after consulting his lawyer, such a retraction also cannot be accepted by the court. Of course, this has to be proven with main evidence. ”Saji Mohan, who was found in possession of 12 kilograms of heroin, was sentenced to 15 years in prison.
.
