Writ Petition (Criminal) Nos. 135 and 204 of 2011. Case: Sanjiv Rajendra Bhatt Vs Union of India (UOI) and Ors.. Supreme Court (India)
| Case Number | Writ Petition (Criminal) Nos. 135 and 204 of 2011 |
| Judges | H.L. Dattu, C.J.I. and Arun Mishra, J. |
| Issue | Contempt of Courts Act - Sections 2, 20; Information Technology Act - Section 66; Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act - Sections 58(1), 58(2); Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 114, 120B, 189, 193, 195, 196, 302, 323, 341, 342, 347, 357, 365, 388, 458, 482, 506(1); Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) - Sections 160, 161, 164, 173, 173... |
| Judgement Date | October 13, 2015 |
| Court | Supreme Court (India) |
Judgment:
Arun Mishra, J.
-
The petitions have been filed by the Petitioner Under Article 32 of the Constitution. In W.P. (Crl.) No. 135/2011, a prayer has been made to direct transfer of the investigation arising out of I-CR. No. 149/2011 registered on the basis of FIR lodged by Mr. K.D. Panth at Ghatlodia Police Station, Ahmedabad, (Rural), Under Sections 189, 193, 195, 341 and 342 of the Indian Penal Code (for short "Indian Penal Code") to any independent agency like CBI outside the control of the State Government. An application being Criminal Misc. Petition No. 15871/2015 has been filed for issuance of further directions in the changed circumstances to appoint an independent Special Investigation Team (SIT) to conduct de novo investigation in the aforesaid FIR. Prayer had also been made to investigate into the additional documents filed on 29.7.2011. Proceedings for contempt Under Article 129 of the Constitution read with Contempt of Courts Act, be initiated against incumbents named in the application, and such other persons as this Court may deem fit. A prayer has also been made to direct certain service providers to preserve the e-mails and/or electronic traces thereof. Criminal Misc. Petition No. 15874/2015 has been filed for impleadment of certain incumbents as Respondents.
-
In W.P. (Crl.) No. 204/2011, a prayer has been made to transfer investigation arising out of II-CR No. 3148/2011 registered on the basis of the FIR lodged by the then Additional Advocate General of State of Gujarat at Vastrapur P.S., Ahmedabad, Gujarat, Under Section 66 of the Information Technology Act, (for short ""the IT Act") to any independent agency like the CBI outside the control of the State Government. Similarly Crl. Misc. Petition No. 15875/2015 for aforesaid directions and for impleadment as Respondents-Crl. Misc. Petition No. 15877/2015 has been filed.
-
In Writ Petition (Crl.) No. 135/2011, the Petitioner has averred that investigation of I-CR No. 149/2011 is required to be transferred to CBI or any other investigating agency/SIT outside the control of the then Chief Minister of Gujarat. Since the aforesaid FIR had been lodged with a view to falsely implicate, pressurize and intimidate the Petitioner and other witnesses as the Petitioner in statements before the SIT as well as before the Commission of Enquiry has divulged certain facts which have the potential of directly implicating high functionary of State of Gujarat in the riots of 2002 alleging that there is an unholy nexus between the prosecuting agency and higher echelons of the Government of Gujarat in certain judicial proceedings including W.P. (Civil) No. 221/2002.
-
The Petitioner has submitted that he joined the service as an IPS Officer way-back in the year 1988 and was allocated to the State of Gujarat. From December, 1999 to September, 2002, he was posted as Deputy Commissioner with the State Intelligence Bureau. He used to look after matters pertaining to internal security of the State, Border Security, Coastal Security, security of vital installations, counter intelligence and VVIP security including that of the Chief Minister. He has alleged that he was present in the meeting convened by the then Chief Minister on the night of 27.2.2002. The instant FIR was a counter-blast at the aforesaid action taken by the Petitioner. The Petitioner has submitted that Ms. Jakia Nasim Ahesan Jafri had filed a complaint on 8.6.2006 which was ordered to be looked into by SIT as per orders of this Court. The Petitioner is a close friend of the then AAG. They have been regularly vacationing together for the last so many years. In 2009, they had made a family trip to Goa. At that time, it is alleged, at the request of the then AAG, the Petitioner had accessed his e-mail account. The Petitioner came across very unusual e-mails received from SIT, (sit.godhracases@gmail.com). It is alleged that someone from SIT was leaking sensitive and confidential contents. A copy of e-mail dated 14.9.2009 (P-4) has been filed.
-
In November, 2009, the Petitioner was informed telephonically by the SIT appointed by this Court. Prior to the scheduled interaction with the SIT, he was approached by the then Minister of State, Home Department, and was sought to be briefed at the office of the then AAG of Gujarat. While appearing before the SIT, he had informed Mr. A.K. Malhotra, Member, SIT, about the episode and also leaking of information by the SIT to the then AAG. His statement was recorded on several occasions in 2009 and 2010 by the SIT. The Petitioner has further averred that he had vacationed again in May-June, 2010 with the then AAG along with family. He was again required to access the e-mail account on several occasions. During the period from February to June, 2010, he came across e-mail exchanges which clearly indicated an unholy and illegal complicity between the then AAG and the functionaries of State of Gujarat. The Petitioner has further averred that on 20.9.2010, he briefed the Additional Chief Secretary (Home) about the leakage of the testimony before the SIT. He was advised to meet the then Chief Minister to clear the air. In the intervening night of 3rd and 4th November, 2010, the house of the Petitioner's mother was ransacked. The Petitioner had lodged FIR (P-5) at Navrangpura Police Station registered as I-CR. No. 449/2010. Again the incident was repeated on the intervening night of 8th and 9th November, 2010 and a steel almirah which could not be broken open on the earlier occasion, was broken and searched. FIR (P-6) was lodged at Navrangpura Police Station as I-CR No. 456/2010. The Petitioner requested for adequate security cover vide letter dated 14.2.2011 (P-7).
-
On 15.3.2011 this Court directed the Chairman, SIT to carry out investigation and submit a report on the observations made by the amicus curiae appointed by this Court. Pursuant thereto the Petitioner was summoned by the SIT Under Section 160 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with the investigation of Meghani Nagar Police Station, I-CR. No. 67/2002. He was issued summons (P-10) for 21.3.2011 Under Section 160 Code of Criminal Procedure The SIT started recording of statements of the Petitioner on 21.3.2011 which was concluded on 25.3.2011. On 25.3.2011 while recording statement of the Petitioner, the SIT expressed its inability to encompass the details indicative of larger conspiracy of official orchestration behind Gujarat riots of 2002. The SIT self-restricted the scope of FIR under investigation. The Petitioner had taken Mr. K.D. Panth along with him to the office of the SIT to corroborate the fact of his having attended the fateful meeting at the residence of the then Chief Minister on the late night of 27.2.2002. SIT was averse to record the statement of Mr. Panth including Mr. Tara Chand Yadav who could have corroborated the fact of Petitioner's presence in the meeting. Later on, the SIT examined Mr. K.D. Panth. While recording statement, he was subjected to intimidation and coercion by the SIT. The fact was informed to him on 6.4.2011 by Mr. K.D. Panth. The Petitioner wrote a letter to the Chairman, SIT about the intimidation meted out to Mr. Panth, and expressed an apprehension as to the role and intention of certain members of the SIT. On 14.4.2011, the Petitioner sent an affidavit to this Court in SLP (Criminal) No. 1088/2008 pointing out certain aspects and inadequacies in the manner and approach of the SIT and intimidation of Mr. Panth. In the affidavit he has also mentioned the details of the meeting convened by the then Chief Minister on 27.2.2002. On 27.4.2011, the Petitioner was summoned by Justice Nanavati and Mehta Commission of Inquiry (for short 'Justice Nanavati Commission') directing him to appear on 16.5.2011. This Court vide order dated 5.5.2011 (P-18) in SLP (Crl.) No. 1088/2008 directed the amicus curiae to examine the record of the SIT. He was permitted to interact with the witnesses examined by the SIT. On 27.5.2011, the Petitioner was asked by amicus curiae to remain at Gandhinagar (Ahmedabad) on 18/19.6.2011.
-
The Petitioner then informed Mr. K.D. Panth and Mr. T.C. Yadav about the forthcoming visit of the amicus curiae. The Petitioner suggested to Mr. T.C. Yadav and Mr. K.D. Panth that they may prepare affidavits to be given to amicus curiae on 18.6.2011. The Petitioner submitted that they agreed and requested the Petitioner to arrange for trustworthy advocate who could help them in preparing and affirming the proposed affidavits in strict confidence. Both the witnesses got their affidavits prepared and affirmed on 17.6.2011 and gave them to the Petitioner. On 18.6.2011 the Petitioner met the amicus curiae. Mr. T.C. Yadav also met amicus curiae. However, Mr. K.D. Panth did not turn up. The Petitioner then handed over a copy of the affidavit affirmed by Mr. K.D. Panth to the amicus curiae. The Petitioner came to know on 22.6.2011 that senior police officials pressurized Mr. K.D. Panth and made him to affirm the affidavit before the Executive Magistrate at Gandhinagar negating the earlier affidavit sworn by him before the Notary Public on 17.6.2011. A written complaint was prepared at the behest of Mr. K.D. Panth on the basis of which at 2330 hrs. on 22.6.2011 an FIR (P-13) was registered at Ghatlodia Police Station as I-CR. No. 149/2011. In the course of the statement before the Commission, the counsel for the State of Gujarat intimidated to the effect that the Petitioner was crossing the line. Certain applications were filed in the ongoing criminal sessions cases to summon the Petitioner Under Section 311 as a witness in May-June, 2011.
The FIR has been registered against the Petitioner. He has no hope of fair investigation in CR. No. 149/2011 hence the petition has been preferred.
-
The State of Gujarat in its counter affidavit has inter alia raised the question of maintainability of the petition and has submitted that the Petitioner is...
To continue reading
Request your trial