The Bombay high court on June 9 dismissed a drug trafficking case registered in 2021 against actor Dalip Tahhil’s son, Dhruv. Calling it “preposterous”, the court held that the law prohibits a merging of several minor aberrations over 18 months into one charge. This is exactly what had led to Dhruv being charged with an offence of higher magnitude.
Pointing out that Dhruv was not even arrested for possession of contraband, Justice Milind Jadhav said, “Prima facie, when section 218 (of CrPC) is read, such charge by prosecution on the face of record appears to be preposterous… The procedural law does not permit the prosecution to assimilate more than three charges into a singular charge over a period of 18 months to be tried together and invoke a singular precipitative action.”
The Bandra Anti-Narcotics Cell in Bombay in May 2021 arrested Dhruv after a co-accused, Muzammil Shaikh, held for possession of 35 gm. of mephedrone, alleged that he had “in the past” supplied to Dhruv and various others. The police said, it recovered WhatsApp messages between July 2019 and January 2021, which allegedly pertained to purchase of 1 gm. or 2 gm. of mephedrone on various occasions, totalling 44 gm. from Shaikh, worth around Rs. 25,000, to justify its invocation of serious charges of drug trafficking against Dhruv in alleged conspiracy with Muzammil Shaikh.
The court noted that for small quantities, the punishment is less — maximum 1 year in jail; but for intermediate quantities (less than commercial) invoked against him, it is 10 years. Justice Jadhav said “the prosecution was aware” that each single act of alleged procurement was “less than small quantities”, and Dhruv would, therefore, get the benefit of doubt, and hence it combined all the alleged transactions without following the tenets of the exception carved under the law. Dhruv had challenged a 2023 rejection of his discharge plea by a special NDPS court.
Justice Jadhav ruled, “From the material available on record and invocations of charge… no case is made out for the applicant to stand trial.” He also said that the alleged WhatsApp chats cannot translate into admissible evidence during trial.
The judge said, the state’s failure to comply with CrPC mandate led to Dhruv being charged with an offence of a higher magnitude.
