Posted:
High Court reserves order on Fardeen Khan's petition in cocaine case
Mumbai, Dec 19: The Bombay High Court today reserved its order on Bollywood star Fardeen Khan's petition seeking immunity from prosecution in a 2001 cocaine seizure case and asking to be sent for detoxification.
Under section 64A of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, an addict accused of possessing drugs in small quantity for personal consumption can be granted immunity from prosecution if he seeks to undergo detoxification at a recognised institute.
Fardeen's said he was about to buy only a gram of cocaine from peddler Nasir Shaikh when they were arrested on May 5, 2001. Since he wanted the drugs for personal consumption, he could be given benefit of Section 64A, he said.
His lawyer K T Tulsi aruged that section 64A differentiated between drug peddlers and addicts and its objective was to help addicts reform themselves through detoxification.
But Additional Public Prosecutor Purnima Kantharia argued that for getting this benefit, Fardeen will have to first prove he was an addict and all he wanted to do was to buy a gram of cocaine for personal consumption.
The prosecution maintained that when Fardeen and Nasir were arrested, nine grams of cocaine were seized. It has not yet accepted Fardeen's claim that he intended to buy only one gram.
Tulsi, however, said it was not necessary to prove that a person is an addict to get amnesty under section 64A.
Fardeen's application said he had kicked his cocaine addiction five years ago and wanted to prove it by undergoing detoxification.
Under section 64A of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, an addict accused of possessing drugs in small quantity for personal consumption can be granted immunity from prosecution if he seeks to undergo detoxification at a recognised institute.
Fardeen's said he was about to buy only a gram of cocaine from peddler Nasir Shaikh when they were arrested on May 5, 2001. Since he wanted the drugs for personal consumption, he could be given benefit of Section 64A, he said.
His lawyer K T Tulsi aruged that section 64A differentiated between drug peddlers and addicts and its objective was to help addicts reform themselves through detoxification.
But Additional Public Prosecutor Purnima Kantharia argued that for getting this benefit, Fardeen will have to first prove he was an addict and all he wanted to do was to buy a gram of cocaine for personal consumption.
The prosecution maintained that when Fardeen and Nasir were arrested, nine grams of cocaine were seized. It has not yet accepted Fardeen's claim that he intended to buy only one gram.
Tulsi, however, said it was not necessary to prove that a person is an addict to get amnesty under section 64A.
Fardeen's application said he had kicked his cocaine addiction five years ago and wanted to prove it by undergoing detoxification.
Cricket
Naagin 7
1