The Narcotics Control Bureau’s (NCB) decision to leave out Aryan Khan, son of actor Shah Rukh Khan, from the chargesheet last week in the so-called drugs-on-cruise ship case in Maharashtra has raised eyebrows in many circles. It is unfortunate that a fabled and civilised city like Mumbai has been the subject of contentious discussion so frequently in the past few years for the crimes reported from there and the inept handling by enforcement agencies. The war between the Centre and the Maharashtra government has only added fuel to fire, each trying to outwit the other through vicious propaganda.
There are again scores of controversies surrounding top appointments in the Maharashtra Police, an index of the malaise that afflicts the police force in the State, which, decades ago, was known for its clean administration. A former Commissioner of Police was recently on the run for several weeks to evade arrest on charges of extortion. The investigation is still going on against him and a former Home Minister of the State. Can anything be more shameful and demoralising to the entire bureaucracy, and not merely the Police?
The controversial arrest
In the Aryan Khan case that erupted in October last year, he was arrested by the NCB along with 19 others following a raid on a cruise ship off the Mumbai coast. This received huge publicity because a celebrity’s son was being held on drug charges. Many speculations started doing the rounds, including one which said that Aryan was being framed. The media was also charged with encashing the controversy. All speculations about inadequacies in the investigation, initially disbelieved, have now been proved right with the Director General of NCB, Satya Narayan Pradhan, admitting that the investigation against Aryan Khan was motivated. This was an unusual action but one that has to be welcomed because no investigating agency ever admits its mistakes. One early report had said that Aryan had consumed drugs, and according to another, some prohibited substance was found in his possession. The latest NCB report to the court that the evidence against Aryan Khan was not sufficient to prosecute him is therefore bound to generate controversy.
The NCB head in Mumbai, Sameer Wankhade, has been transferred and an inquiry has been ordered against him. This bizarre episode should raise several issues, chief of which is the integrity of investigating agencies in the country. The NCB may have to set its house in order by undertaking a clinical review of its procedures and personnel policies. The quantum of discretion of officers in the middle and lower levels may have to be reduced substantially.
Political interventions
The flip flop in the Aryan case is in tune with the manner in which investigations in many other cases involving well-known public figures charged with crime are conducted all over the country, both by the State police and other agencies.. No State government is a saint in the matter. Total emasculation of the police is a tragedy that will continue to characterise the force indefinitely. Excessive media attention and the tendency of the lower political spectrum belonging to the establishment to intrude into what should be the sole preserve of government agencies are facts which are undeniable in every State. The unfortunate victims of this unwholesome exchange of fire are the accused, who are indicted even before the arrival of a judicial decision.
Another arrest by the NCB that hit the headlines in 2020 was that of Rhea Chakraborty who was in a relationship with actor Sushant Singh Rajput. The latter was found dead under mysterious circumstances. While the case was initially investigated by the Enforcement Directorate and later by the CBI on the Supreme Court’s direction, the NCB subsequently stepped in to investigate the rumour that Rhea and her brother were instrumental in supplying marijuana to Sushant. This led to Rhea’s arrest in September 2020 and she was released a month later. Nothing further has been heard in this case.
The message that emanates from the two cases is that drug law enforcement agencies are often caught in a serious dilemma. If they do not detain the suspects involved at the earliest stage of an investigation, they can be accused of going slow just to favour the accused. If the detainees are subsequently let off for want of evidence, agency officials are accused of either human rights violations or dishonesty. It will not be incorrect to say that many enforcement decisions are a knee-jerk response induced mainly by the fear of loss of reputation and vilification by the media, which is fond of sensationalism. Ultimately, honesty in controversial investigations rests on an officer's own reputation and his ability to withstand pressure from various quarters including the ruling political party.
R.K. Raghavan is a former CBI Director and currently teaches criminal justice and policing at the Jindal Global University, Sonepat
