Observing that he entered into a conspiracy with a co-accused to extort ₹25 crore from the family of Aryan Khan to not make him an accused, a special Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) court on Wednesday rejected the anticipatory bail application of Sanville D'Souza - former Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) zonal director Sameer Wankhede’s co-accused in the extortion case of the CBI against them and others.
The court also considered the gravity and seriousness of the offence as also the necessity for custodial interrogation. Special CBI Judge SM Menjoge stated in the order that he is not entitled to anticipatory bail.
Suspects' names missing from FIR
The court had perused the case diary of the CBI, that contains sensitive probe details. It noted that a Special Enquiry Team of the NCB formed to probe into dishonest conduct of some officers in connection with the Cordelia drugs bust case, had found that names of some suspects were dropped from the FIR. The SET’s probe report had revealed that an informer of the NCB had provided the names of 27 persons suspected to be carrying drugs in the luxury ship on Oct 2, based on the information a raid was conducted. The probe report said that the list was modified to 10 names. It is on the SET’s findings that the CBI had registered the FIR. The court also noted that one Siddharth Shah who had supplied charas to Arbaaz Merchant (Aryan Khan’s friend) was allowed to walk free by an NCB officer.
If give relief, D'Souza will withhold information: CBI Prosecutor
D'Souza - a private citizen, had sought the relief on the grounds that neither Shah Rukh Khan nor his son or other family members had made any formal complaint against them in the matter nor were their statements recorded by the CBI. CBI prosecutor PKB Gaikwad had opposed the protection from arrest and told the court that if given the relief, D’Souza will not reveal details during interrogation, which will affect the investigation.
DSouza had approached the Bombay HC earlier seeking the relief, but had withdrawn his plea after the HC had indicated that it is not inclined to grant it and had asked him to approach the competent court.
.jpg)
