New Delhi: A Delhi court on Wednesday directed
the Tihar jail superintendent to produce a Nigerian national,
facing trial for his alleged role in a drug abuse and peddling
case involving late BJP leader Pramod Mahajan`s son Rahul
Mahajan, before a Kolkata court on May 31.
James was produced before the court yesterday after
Additional Sessions Judge S C Rajan had earlier ordered the
Kolkata correctional home superintendent, where he was lodged,
to produce him before it.
"Egbedokun James Taiwo was taken into custody in this
case and was remanded to judicial custody till today. Notice
be issued to the jail superitendent number 4, central jail
Tihar, with the direction to produce Taiwo on May 31 before
the court of Rabinder Nath Mallick, ASJ, FTC number three at
city sessions court, Kolkata, Dalhousie square, Kolkata....,"
the court said.
The judge also said James be brought back to Delhi and
then be produced before the court on next date of hearing on
The remaining prosecution evidence in the case could not
be placed today as the main file of the case, which was sent
to the Delhi High Court earlier, was not received back.
Rahul Mahajan is accused of consuming and distributing
drugs at the official residence of his slain father in a late
night party on June 2, 2006.
Mahajan, along with his late father`s secretary Vivek
Moitra, was later admitted to Apollo Hospital here in the wee
hours of June 2, 2006, after allegedly consuming drugs. Moitra
later died in the hospital.
The sessions court had earlier framed charges against
Mahajan and his accomplices Harish Sharma, Sahil Zaroo,
Nigerian nationals Abdul Latif Ashola alias Mohd Abdullah,
Taiwo and others under the Indian Penal Code and the NDPS Act
for their roles in the case.
The trial in the case was stalled earlier for over two
years as the Delhi High Court had summoned the sessions court
documents to adjudicate revision petitions of Rahul and
others challenging the framing of charges against them.
The accused had moved the high court contending they had
been unduly charged under harsher provisions of the Narcotics
Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act. On the other
hand, police had claimed they were booked under rather milder
sections of the Act.