Maneshinde, who appeared for Rhea and her brother in the bail applications before HC, had argued that the Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) had not filed a case for a non-bail offense. and that he had invented serious charges of ‘financing illicit trafficking’ with criminal conspiracy were invoked “simply to argue against giving him bail.”
Bail should be given when drug quantities are small, a Delhi high court divisional court had said, and Maneshinde had said that not only were no drugs seized, but allegations that they were buying quantities for Rajput personal use they could only amount to small amounts and he gave them the right to bail.
Attorney Taraq Sayed, who appeared on behalf of another defendant in the case, had also argued that when the quantity of drugs is small, the most serious non-bail charge under NDPS Section 27A of ‘financing illicit trafficking’ does not It can be invoked since the crime is understood to deal with drug traffickers on a larger scale and internationally. But NCB has said that since the crime says nothing about the amounts being funded, it would also apply to the case against Rhea.
Other independent and senior attorneys said that in 2001, an amendment was made to the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (NDPS) to impose punishment based on three categories of quantities of drugs seized. Since then, the courts have held that when the crimes did not involve commercial amounts, they would be bail.
Attorney Amit Desai said the intent of the law must be taken into account. “The legislator himself takes a more empathetic approach to small-quantity matters, as confirmed by several rulings, when they upheld strict bail provisions that would not apply to small quantities. Therefore, the courts must, on a concept of disposition susceptible of interpretation, lean in favor of personal liberty ”.
Desai said: “In my opinion, financing is well known in the business world. It is essentially a form of loan. You cannot say that a consumer who buys with his own funds is financing a narcotic activity. ”
A lawyer in Mumbai, Pranav Badheka, said: “Even accepting the NCB case as reported, at the highest it appears to be a small amount case against most of the defendants, and the higher courts have held that when it comes to small amounts of drugs, bail should be the norm. ”
The CS in its sentence of August 19 had said: “The dissemination of the real facts through an impartial investigation would certainly result in justice for the innocent, who could be the target of a smear campaign. Equally important, when the integrity and credibility of the investigation is perceived, the trust, faith and trust of the common man in the judicial process will resonate. When the truth meets the sunlight, justice will not prevail over the living alone, but after the intermittent rush of Life, now the dead will sleep well too. Satyameva Jayate “.
On Saturday, Maneshinde also used the term ‘Satyameva Jayate’ in his reaction to reports on the AIIMS findings.
While the CBI, which is investigating the actor’s death, is now reported to be likely to continue its investigation into Rea’s “complicity in suicide” charge, legal experts point to higher court rulings imposing a burden. very high test to such a charge. The CS has said in several trials that suicide instigation “involves a mental process of instigating a person or intentionally helping that person.”
.
