Prosecution justified in invoking stringent anti-drug law provisions against Deepika Padukone's manager: Court

The prosecution was justified in invoking stringent provisions of the NDPS Act pertaining to illicit trafficking of drugs against Karishma Prakash a special court here observed while denying prearrest bail to the manager of Bollywood actress Deepika Padukone in a drug case linked to the death of actor Sushant Singh RajputThe special NDPS court rejected Prakashs anticipatory bail plea on August 5 and a detailed copy of the order was made available on WednesdayHer lawyer had pleaded that no prima facie material was brought before the court to show provisions under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances NDPS Act Section 27A are attracted in the caseSection 27A of NDPS Act provides a stringent framework for punishing offences related to illicit traffic of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances through imprisonment and forfeiture of propertyHer lawyer had argued that the prosecution has also not shown any material or evidence on which it wants to rely upon to justify the addition of the section during hearing of her anticipatory bail applicationHowever special judge V V Vidwans said Considering the prima facie material and evidence on record I am of the view that the prosecution was justified in invoking provisions of Section 27A of the NDPS Act during the pendency of this applicationThe defence had vehemently argued that the only evidence against the applicant was statements of coaccused persons in the caseThe same would not be admissible in view of a law laid by the Supreme Court Prakashs lawyer had submittedBut the court said Though statements of coaccused would not be admissible as evidence during the trial of the case it can be considered by the court while deciding anticipatory bail application at the stage of investigation as prima facie circumstance on record and material against the applicantDuring hearing of the application Prakashs lawyer had placed before that court a mobile phone recording to show malafides on part of the prosecution while adding section 27A of the antidrug lawHowever the court held it was not sufficient for accepting the contention about malafides made by the defenceIt is only prima facie material and would require evidence to be laid for proving such malafides in the case on behalf the prosecution the court saidI am of the considered view that assuming for the sake of arguments that there exist malafides on part of the prosecution it cannot override the merits of the casetherefore anticipatory bail cannot be granted to the applicant merely on the ground that malafides exist as has been tried to be demonstrated in the course of arguments by counsel for the applicant the judge saidFearing arrest in the drugrelated probe into the death of Rajput Prakash filed an anticipatory bail application before the NDPS court in October last yearAfter hearing extensive submissions made by both the defence and prosecution the judge last week rejected her pleaThe court however stayed the order till August 25 to allow Prakash to approach the Bombay High CourtThe Narcotics Control Bureau NCB has been probing alleged nexus between drug peddlers and Bollywood celebrities which came to light after Rajputs death in June last yearThe CBI is separately probing the case of Rajputs deathPrakashs name cropped up during interrogation of one of the arrested drug peddlersThe central agency has so far arrested more than 20 people as part of its investigation into the drug caseMost of the accused including the late actors girlfriend Rhea Chakraborty are out on bail currentlyThis story has been sourced from a third party syndicated feed agencies Midday accepts no responsibility or liability for its dependability trustworthiness reliability and data of the text Midday managementmiddaycom reserves the sole right to alter delete or remove without notice the content in its absolute discretion for any reason whatsoever