Rhea Chakraborty’s bail plea rejected by Mumbai Sessions Court in Sushant Singh Rajput case

Actress Rhea Chakraborty is currently placed in the Byculla women’s jail after the NCB arrested her in the drug angle related to Sushant Singh Rajput case. The Mumbai Sessions Court has rejected her bail plea and she will continue to remain in 14 days judicial custody till September 22. Earlier her bail plea was rejected by the Magistrate Court as it was believed she would tamper with evidence and influence other suspects involved in the case. The sessions court however, did not give any reason for rejection of her plea.

Rhea Chakraborty

Along with Rhea, five others involve in the drug angle also had pleaded for bail after being arrested by the Narcotics Control Bureau, namely Showik Chakraborty, Abdul Basit, Zaid Vilatra, Dipesh Sawant and Samuel Miranda. Their pleas too have been rejected and their lawyers have been advised to approach the Bombay High Court for further hearings related to bails.

In the plea raised by Rhea’s lawyer, it was stated that,  “She has not committed any crime whatsoever and has been falsely implicated in the case.” Earlier when Showik’s plea was raised, the NCB had opposed it stating that,”he is an active member of a drug syndicate connected with drug supplies”.

Also read: Kangana lashes out at Uddhav Thackeray on Twitter: Your father’s good deeds can give you wealth, but you have to earn respect

In response to the Special Sessions Court, the NCB claimed, “Accused Rhea Chakraborty has acknowledged their statements and her role explained. During statement present accused Rhea Chakraborty revealed about her involvement in procurement of drug and financial transaction and also her instructions to Samuel Miranda, Dipesh Sawant and applicant Showik Chakraborty in this regard. Therefore it is clear from statement that applicant is an active member of a drug syndicate connected with drug supplies. Showik was making payment for the drugs, which Samuel Mirinda and Dipesh Sawant took the delivery for and handed over those drugs to Rajput. Therefore, it is clear that the drugs, which were financed, were not meant for personal consumption but for supplying the same to other persons. Therefore, 27 A of NDPS Act 1985 is clearly applicable and applicant cannot escape the clutches of the law.”

Related Articles

Back to top button