[Rhea Bail Hearing-LIVE UPDATES] Bombay HC Hearing On Bail Application Of Rhea Chakraborty And Others In NDPS Case

Maneshinde : Drastic changes(regarding rigourus condition to grant bail) were regarding commercial quantities. That was the object behind the 2001 amendment.

Justice Kotwal : If it is small quantity, the rigour of Section 37 will not apply? But will that make the offence bailable.

Maneshinde : Yes.

J Kotwal : They (judges in the precedent) have not said that. They said Section 37 will not apply.

"Judges should note that bar for granting bail in respect of the offences under the Act is made dependent on specific offences, enumerated in amended Section 37 of the Act & involvement of commercial quantity or more of the contraband article" - Maneshinde quotes from precedent.

..under the amended provision the restriction on granting bail is dependent on specific offences under the Act and also involvement of a contraband article of commercial quantity or more under this Act", Maneshinde (Rhea's lawyer) quotes from the precedent.

Maneshinde agrees. He cites the decision of Bombay HC in "Pramod Ganpat Wankhede And Anr. vs State Of Maharashtra".

Justice Kotwal interrupts Maneshinde and says he wants to hear on the bailable/non-bailable aspect under the NDPS Act.

The 1989 amendment to NDPS Act, which inserted Sections 27 and substituted Section 37 to impose rigorous conditions for grant of bail was made pursuant to the UN Convention on illicit drug trafficking : Maneshinde (Rhea's lawyer)

Adv Satish Maneshinde (lawyer for Rhea & Showik) making submissions about the legislative history of NDPS Act.

If the recoveries are small quantities, the offences are bailable : Adv Sayeed

Where the offences are punishable with a maximum of one year sentence, such offences ought to be regarded as bailable under NDPS Act, submits Adv Sayeed.