TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (8) TMI 1594
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tempt Petition(Civil) No(s). ..........of 2024(D.No. 1106 of 2024) in SLP(Crl.) No(s). 14489 of 2023 1. The instant petition under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 read with Article 129 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner alleging wilful disobedience by the respondents-contemnors of the order dated 8th December, 2023 passed by this Court in SLP(Crl.) No. 14489 of 2023. Brief facts: - 2. The petitioner, along with other co-accused, was arraigned as an accused in FIR No. 11210068230266 dated 21st July, 2023 filed by the contemnor-respondent No. 6 herein(the complainant), with an allegation that the petitioner had received a sum of Rs. 1.65 crores in cash from the complainant towards the sale of 15 shops but the possession thereof was not handed over to the complainant despite the assurance given by the accused at the time of entering into an oral agreement. 3. The petitioner, apprehending his arrest in connection with the said FIR, sought anticipatory bail from the Sessions Court, which was denied whereafter, an application for anticipatory bail was filed before the High Court, which also came to be rejected. Being ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....or the matter of offence committed u/s. 420, 120(b) of Indian Penal Code registered before Vesu Police Station vide Part-A- 11210068230366/2023 Complainant Abhishek Vinodkumar Goswami aged: 28 years, occupation: Business Real Estate Residing at C/405, Surya Palace, Ct Light, Surat City Mobile No 9879215044 filed a complaint against you and others for which you are remained present as per order passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the matter of Special Leave Application No. 14489/2023 on 08/12/2023 and you were arrested on 11/12/2023 at 2100 hrs and thereafter, released on bail on basis of the order of the court. During course of investigation proceedings of the offence, you are hereby informed to remain in(sic) present by yourself or through your advocate on 13/12/2023 at 1500 hrs before 5th Additional Senior Civil Judge and ACJM Surat Court No 608, New Court Building, Athwalines Surat for the matter of remand which please note seriously. Date 12/12/2023 R.Y. Raval Police Inspector Vesu Police Station Surat City To, Tushar Rajnikant Shah Residing at Flat No E/902, Florence Building, Opp Rajhans Cinema, VIP Road, Vesu, Surat City Mobile No 9825038475" ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....at he is the builder and accordingly the Complainant and witness obtained A sum of Rs. 1,65,00,000/- as consideration and also by way of cheque a sum of Rs. 54,00,000/- also obtained and in that regard accused no.5, 6 and 7 given payment Diaries and then planned delinquency by the accused Conspirator committed the offense of cheating [deception] fraud. According to the ground for remand, they submit that the main accused has taken total of 9 cheques from the complainant which cheques are important for the present matter and same are required to be collected for the purpose of investigation proceedings. Recovery of Rs. 1,65,00,000/- is pending and in furtherance, addition of other offence of Umra Police Station First Criminal Register No 62/2019 for offence committed u/s. 447, 448, 451, 427, 114 of Indian Penal Code is registered and accordingly, accused person having criminal history and does not cooperate with police investigations The other co-accused are absconding, and hence, requested to allow police custody remand of Days-7. 3. On 05/10/2023, Learned Advocate Shri Dipesh Dalal on behalf of accused person produced copy of order of R/Criminal Misc. Appln [For....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sed are yet to be arrested, police investigation is pending in that direction. In the present matter it is pending investigation as to which accused took the paid compensation of the project property; the main accused has admitted in his statement that the diary was written by him. So, it becomes clear that their criminal role is there and if we note the extreme importance, in the present matter the prosecution has made serious allegations of pre- planned and criminal conspiracy, then a thorough investigation is pending in that regard. In the present matter it becomes necessary to bring the modus operandi of the accused on record. At this stage, it is to be noted that in the present time, the amount of offence related to property like land and houses has increased, in which most of the builder level people are also involved, while in the present matter, there is a deal of 15 shops, so the compensation amount is Rs. 1,65,00,000/- paid, thorough investigation of the offence becomes necessary so the reasons stated in the remand application are true. The present application is eligible to be granted if the co-accused is investigated properly and the modus operandi of the offence ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the petitioner was presented before the 6th ACJM(contemnor-respondent No. 7) at the end of the remand period, he made a complaint regarding torture in police custody which fact was noted by the 6th ACJM(contemnor- respondent No. 7) in the order sheet dated 16th December, 2023. The 6th ACJM(contemnor-respondent No. 7) proceeded to record the statement of the petitioner virtually as if he was being cross- examined. She also undertook an exercise of self-observation of the legs of the accused-petitioner and made a remark in the proceeding sheet that no signs of beating were visible thereupon. These proceedings are relevant to the issue at hand in a limited sphere and thus, the same are reproduced hereinbelow for the sake of ready reference:- "My name is Tushar Rajnikant Shah, I am 43 years old. I want to say many things, but my mental condition is not proper so that I can properly dictate everything. Question: What is your complaint against police? Answer: Yes, I am beaten a lot, tortured also. Question: On which part of body beaten? Answer: Allowing me to sit and on the bottom of the leg beaten and beaten with belt written as Satyashodahk Yantra. Ques....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he has not been provided with food cannot be believed. The accused in the beginning had stated that, he has a lot of things to say but due his mental condition, he has not been able to express everything clearly. However, it is peculiar to note that during the aforesaid statement made by the accused, he was frequently looking at his Ld. Advocate while giving reply due to which the accused was asked that, "why are you looking at your Advocate and giving reply, ill-treatment is done with you then you must be aware what has happened and it is you who have to give your statement." Thereafter, he has given his statement. The accused has not complained that he is mentally tortured. At this stage, it is notable to mention that the accused is working as a builder having a reputation in society and in such condition and circumstances, remaining in police custody for interrogation, could have been uncomfortable to him. Taking into consideration the mental state of the accused, the serious allegations made by him against the police could not be found reasonable and justifiable in view of the present case and circumstances. All the aforesaid observations and evaluations made today is noted by ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s order are also considered germane for the purpose of adjudication of the instant contempt petition since the same has a direct bearing upon the conduct of contemnor-respondent No. 7 and hence, the same are being reproduced hereinbelow for the sake of ready reference: - "Criminal Inquiry No. 280/2023 ORDER BELOW EX-1 1. The said private complaint is filed by complainant Tushar Rajnikant Shah against police officers u/s 323, 342, 344, 363, 384, 504, 506(2), 120(b) of IPC. It is submitted in complainants application that against him in Vesu Police Station A-part CR No. 11210068230266/23 is filed u/s 420, 120(b) on date 21.7.2023 wherein he was mentioned as accused no. 4. Investigation officer has taken his statement. The complainant has filed in the Hon'ble Court of Principal District and Sessions Judge at Surat Anticipatory bail application no. 5922/2023 on date 27.7.2023 which was rejected on date 1.8.2023. Thereafter he has filled in the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court CRMA No. 15242/2023 and made order partly allowing the same, being aggrieved by it the complainant filed SLP in Hon'ble Supreme Court on date 5.10.2023 bearing No. 14489/2023 and ord....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....paikee which accused did not allow him to speak such, no such facts are stated. Thereafter he was clearly asked that on completion of remand and on producing in this Court he has stated his facts willingly as per his desire which is replied by him in affirmative. Thereafter he was asked that this Court has at the same time ask him to sit down and checked his bottom of the legs but no signs of beating was found such is stated and he gave his reply in affirmative. Thus, said verification considering entirely with the complaint in Vesu Police Station A-part CR No. 11210068230266/23, the accused has filed ill-treatment complaint and therefore in the present separately given complaint nothing remains to be done. Main notable facts is such that in medical certificate of the accused no signs of assault are seen and this Court has personally done observation but no such signs are seen. Further, this Court has on the same day after observing the accused personally in details of observation and evaluation noted and considering it the complainant's private complaint is not maintainable. The accused naturally remained in police custody and in police lock up, have dissatisfaction again....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... or not. That learned Magistrate has acted erroneously and has passed the impugned order which is illegal and improper and hence, the same is required to be set aside. 12. On perusal of the impugned order, it appears that the complainant was directed to remain present with his witnesses and as per the submission of the learned senior advocate for the applicant, witnesses were present before the learned Magistrate, but their statements have not been recorded. No reasons have been given by the learned Magistrate for non- recording of the statements of the witnesses and hence, the applicant original complainant has not been given full opportunity for putting up his case before the learned Magistrate. That the impugned order is improper and perverse and is required to be set aside. Learned(sic) 13. Under the circumstances, the application is allowed. The impugned order dated 6.1.2024 passed below Exh.1 in Criminal Inquiry No. 280 of 2023 is quashed and set aside. The learned Magistrate is directed to record the statements of the witnesses and then after applying judicial mind to the material placed before the Court, form the judgment whether or not, there is sufficient ground ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....oner by assigning a totally flimsy justification that this Court had not precluded the Investigating Officer from seeking police custody remand of the petitioner nor was the Magistrate prohibited from exercising such power. In support of the submission that there was no scope to remand the petitioner to police custody, learned senior counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on the judgment passed by this Court in the case of Siddhram Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra [2011) 1 SCC 694]. 18.5 He urged that in spite of the interim order of anticipatory bail granted by this Court being in currency, the petitioner was not released from custody even at the end of the police remand period, and rather, he was compelled to file a regular bail application under Section 437 CrPC to which the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor(APP) objected. However, the application was allowed, and the bail bonds of the petitioner were accepted, and he was released from custody on 18th December, 2023 which aggravates the contemptuous acts of the contemnor- respondent No. 7 because the petitioner was kept in illegal custody for more than 48 hours. As per learned senior counsel, it is a clea....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....disobedience of the mandate of this Court's judgment in the case of Paramvir Singh Saini v. Baljit Singh and Another [(2021) 1 SCC 184]. 18.10 That as per the reply affidavit filed by the Commissioner of Police, Surat(contemnor-respondent No. 2), the FSL examination carried out on the internal storage(hard disk) and the DVR reveals that the CCTV footage of Vesu Police Station from 13th December, 2023 to 16th December, 2023 was not found in hard disk which clearly establishes that the police officials had tampered with the DVR and deleted the data saved between 13th December, 2023 to 16th December, 2023, in order to destroy the evidence of custodial violence committed upon the petitioner. 18.11 That the very fact, that the police officials registered the FIR on the basis of complaint filed by complainant(contemnor-respondent No. 6), being FIR No. 11210068230266 for allegations which ex facie disclose a civil dispute plain and simple, reflects their mala fide and biased approach. On these grounds, the learned senior counsel implored the Court to prosecute and suitably punish the respondents while holding them guilty of wilful disobedience/gross contempt of this C....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973." The Division Bench answered the reference in affirmative and thus, there was no impediment for the Investigating Officer to have sought police custody remand of the petitioner and that the learned Magistrate was also acting well within the jurisdiction conferred upon her by CrPC while granting police remand of the petitioner. 20. The learned counsel representing the contemnor-respondent Nos. 2 to 7 submitted in cohesion that all the contemnors have tendered unconditional apology in their reply affidavits for the alleged contumacious acts. They urged that the contemnors had no intention whatsoever to disobey or disregard this Court's order dated 8th December, 2023 and the infraction, if any, in this regard is purely unintentional and thus, a lenient view may be taken and the contempt notices may be discharged. 21. Mr. S.V. Raju, learned ASG appearing on behalf of Commissioner of Police, Surat(contemnor-respondent No. 2) advanced the following submissions: - 21.1 That respondent No. 2 has no direct role in the contempt proceedings and thus the contempt notice issued to him may be discharged. 21.2 That Commissioner ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....olice Station, she submitted that the CCTV cameras had been installed some time back and were functional but there was some problem with the DVR storage not just during the 3 days of custodial period of the petitioner but was persisting since November, 2023. On these grounds, Ms. Bhati, learned ASG implored the Court to accept the unconditional apology filed on behalf of contemnor-respondent No. 3 and discharge the contempt notice issued to him. 23. Mr. K. Parameshwar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Shri R.Y. Raval, Police Inspector(contemnor-respondent No. 4) urged that the officer had no intention whatsoever to disregard or wilfully disobey this Court's order. He advanced the following submissions: - 23.1 At the outset, Investigating Officer(contemnor-respondent No. 4) in his reply affidavit has tendered an unconditional apology for any contumacious act/conduct arising of inadvertent action/omission attributed to him in the contempt proceedings. 23.2 That when the petitioner appeared at the police station with the order of this Court dated 8th December, 2023, he was immediately released on bail by accepting his bail bonds. However, the petitioner gave ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nbsp;4 is already facing departmental proceedings in relation to these very allegations and hence, these contempt proceedings would tantamount to double jeopardy. On strength of the above submissions, learned counsel implored the Court to take a sympathetic view and discharge the contempt notice issued to contemnor-respondent No. 4. 24. Learned senior counsel, Mr. D.N. Ray, representing 6th ACJM No. 6(contemnor-respondent No. 7), at the outset, submitted that the judicial officer is having an impeccable service record. She had no intention whatsoever of committing wilful or intentional disobedience of this Court's order and that the judicial officer has expressed unconditional and unqualified apology for the acts done in discharge of judicial functions which are wrongly branded as contumacious by the petitioner. He advanced the following submissions: - 24.1 On perusing the remand application filed by the Investigating Officer, the contemnor-respondent No. 7 inculcated a reasonable belief that the petitioner was not cooperating with the investigation in terms of the order passed by this Court. 24.2 She was also guided by the long prevailing practice being f....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r of police custody remand. She had no intention whatsoever to flout or disregard the order passed by this Court and that she tenders unconditional apology for any act or omission committed by her which may be construed to be in disregard to the order dated 8th December, 2023. On these submissions, he implored the Court to condone the unintentional act of the contemnor-respondent No. 7 and to discharge the contempt notice issued to her. 25. By way of additional submissions, Shri S.V. Raju, learned ASG appearing on behalf of Kamal Dayani, Additional Chief Secretary, Government of Gujarat(contemnor-respondent No. 1) and Shri R. Basant, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the High Court of Gujarat(respondent No. 8) tried to persuade the Court that no contempt was committed by any of the contemnors, by harping upon the prevailing practice in the State of Gujarat that the Courts, be it the Sessions Court or the High Court while passing pre-arrest bail orders under Section 438 CrPC, invariably incorporate a clause to the effect that in case the Investigating Officer wants to seek police custody of the accused, an application in this regard may be filed before....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r-respondent No. 2 is thus, discharged. 30. Shri Vijaysinh Gurjar, contemnor-respondent No. 3 being the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Zone-4, Surat has sworn an affidavit tendering unconditional apology for any of the acts/omissions which may have led to the order of this Court being flouted. 31. We may note that the reply affidavit of this Officer(contemnor- respondent No. 3) is relevant only in context of non-functioning of the CCTV cameras and the custodial torture allegedly meted out to the petitioner during police custody for the period between 13th December, 2023 and 16th December, 2023, wherein it is alleged that the petitioner was beaten in the presence of the said contemnor. The following averments are made in the reply affidavit filed by contemnor-respondent No. 3:- 31.1 At para 6 of the reply affidavit, it has been stated that the respondent was busy in the preparation and deployment on account of visit of the Hon'ble Prime Minister of India in Surat on 17th December, 2023. In connection with the said preparations, he had briefly visited Vesu Police Station on 13th December, 2023. He has denied having any role to play in the investigation of the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nor-respondent No. 3 is thus, discharged. 33. The language of the remand application filed by the Investigating Officer, Shri R.Y. Raval(contemnor-respondent No. 4) would be relevant for dealing with his case and hence, the same is reproduced hereinbelow: - "To 5th Additional Senior Civil Judge and Additional Civil Judicial Magistrate, New Court Building, Surat City SUB TO ALLOW REMAND FOR DAYS-7 OF ACCUSED PERSON I, R.Y.Rawal, I/c Police Inspector Vesu Police Station Surat City respectfully submitting that, On 21/07/2023 Complainant Abhishek Vinodkumar Goswami Aged: 28 years Occupation: Business of Real Estate residing at C/405, Surya Palace, City Light, Surat City Mobile No 9879215044 preferred complaint before Vesu Police Station Part A 11210068230266/2023 for offence committed under Section 420,120(B) of Indian Penal Code against Accused persons (1) Partners of Shrestha Group Developers Bhavinbhai Durhabbhai Patel Resident of Navi Colony Sarthana Village Surat Mobile No 9925112073 (2) Pradip Tamakuwala Mobile No 9227906150 (3) Vasant Patel (4) Tusharbhai Rajnikantbhai Shah Mobile No 9825038475 (5) Sumit Goenka Mobile No 7710827133 (6) Rajsing Mobile No 635....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... required to be in police custody. 2. Accused person of this matter Tushar Shah issued cheques to the complainant of Kotak Mahindra Bank, Kumbhariya Cheque No. (1) 000394 dated 31/01/2023 signed in the name of authorized signatory of Branch, Surat for a sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- and (2) 000395 dated 31/01/2023 for a sum of Rs. 2,00,000/-(3) 000396 dated 31/01/23 a sum of Rs. 2,00,000/-(4) 000397 dated 31/01/2023 a sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- (5) 000398 31/01/2023 a sum of Rs. 2,00,000/-(6) 000022 14/02/2023 a sum of Rs. 11,00,000/- (7) 000021 10/02/2023 a sum of Rs. 11,00,000/- (8) 000023 dated 18/02/2023 a sum of Rs. 11,00,000/- (9) 00024 dated 20/02/23 a sum of Rs. 11,00,000/- and with regard to said cheques, Accused have not disclosed any material fact that they are not cooperating with the investigation proceedings regarding the places where the Cheques are kept and also all the above Cheques are important circumstantial evidences which have to be grabbed [seized] for the purpose of investigation proceedings so the presence of the accused in the police custody is required. 3. The complainant and the witness paid a sum of Rs.&....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ate was given to the accused for seeking his police remand. The language of the notice has been reproduced at para 5(supra) and it does not give a whisper of indication that the accused was not cooperating in the investigation. 35. We are of the firm opinion that non-cooperation by the accused is one matter and the accused refusing to confess to the crime is another. There would be no obligation upon the accused that on being interrogated, he must confess to the crime and only thereafter, would the Investigating Officer be satisfied that the accused has cooperated with the investigation. As a matter of fact, any confession made by the accused before a police officer is inadmissible in evidence and cannot even form a part of the record. 36. This Court vide order dated 12th July, 2024 passed in Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 10536/2023 titled as 'Sanuj Bansal v. The State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr.' has held that such confessions recorded in the interrogation notes of the accused cannot form part of the charge sheet. 37. Looking at the allegations in the FIR, we are of the firm view that the Investigating Officer should have, at the first instance, put the compl....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... such information could lead to discovery of an incriminating fact, perhaps the remand application could have been justified to some extent. However, that is not the situation in the case at hand. 40. The narration made in the remand application that the Investigating Officer wanted to find out about the criminal antecedents of the accused is also fanciful on the face of it. With the digitisation of the records, the criminal antecedents/records of accused would be readily available on CCTNS i.e., Crime and Criminal Tracking Network System and thus, the Investigating Officer could not have sought police custody remand of the accused in order to find out his criminal antecedents. 41. Apparently thus, the Investigating Officer(contemnor- respondent No. 4), while filing the remand application, made blatant misinterpretations and procured the police custody of the accused-petitioner who was under the protective umbrella of this Court's order dated 8th December, 2023. 42. If at all, by any stretch of imagination, the Investigating Officer felt genuine and bona fide requirement to seek police custody remand of the petitioner, then the proper course of action would have been to mo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....und that he was not cooperating with the investigation as directed by this Court. The petitioner, neither filed any written protest nor any affidavit to oppose the remand application. He also did not make an affirmative statement of having cooperated with the Investigating Agency by providing information and documents in his possession. An emphatic denial has been given by the contemnor- respondent No. 7 to the plea of the petitioner that the order granting police remand was passed without providing a fair opportunity of hearing to the petitioner or his Advocate. 43.5 At para No. 5.3 of the reply affidavit, the contemnor-respondent No. 7 has reiterated that this Court vide order dated 8th December, 2023, granted ad- interim relief in favour of the petitioner with a direction to the petitioner to cooperate with the investigation and thus, order of remand was passed considering the purport of para 5 of the order(supra) dated 8th December, 2023. 43.6 At para No. 5.4 of the reply affidavit, contemnor- respondent No. 7 has stated that as the order of this Court was not being complied with by the petitioner and since investigation was permitted to be conti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Judicial Magistrate directing that the complaint should be placed for verification which would mean recording the statements under Sections 200 and 202 CrPC could have been reviewed by her. Be that as it may, the order dated 6th January, 2024 passed by the contemnor-respondent No. 7 has already been set aside by the High Court of Gujarat by exercising revisional jurisdiction vide order dated 22nd December, 2024 passed in R/Criminal Revision Application No. 273 of 2024. 43.10 At para Nos. 10 and 10.1 of the reply affidavit, it has been pleaded that the contemnor-respondent has served the judiciary honestly, sincerely and with total commitment since 2010 and that she continues to discharge her duties within the four corners of law. She had bona fide misinterpreted the order of this Court and her sole intention was to secure the interest of justice and hence, the acts alleged should not be termed to be wilful and deliberate disobedience of this Court's order dated 8th December, 2023 as alleged by the petitioner. 44. The contemnor-respondent No. 7 has placed emphatic reliance on the following lines from this Court's order dated 8th December, 2023: - "5. How....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....h of contemnor-respondent No. 7 in first granting police custody of the petitioner on a clearly frivolous and mala fide remand application filed by Investigating Officer(contemnor-respondent No. 4), and in trying to justify the same in her reply affidavit, that it was based on so called prevalent practice in the State of Gujarat cannot be countenanced. It is noteworthy that despite the period of police custody remand having come to an end on 16th December, 2023, the accused petitioner was further detained till 18th December, 2023 on which date, he was released on bail upon furnishing fresh bail bonds, which is clearly in teeth of this Court's order dated 8th December, 2023. The contemnor-respondent No. 7 has clearly stated in the reply affidavit that no order was passed remanding the accused- petitioner to judicial custody. In this background, detention of the accused till 18th December, 2023 was absolutely unconstitutional and contrary to the letter and spirit of Articles 20 and 21 of the Constitution of India. This Court has placed the individual freedom and right to liberty at the highest pedestal in numerous decisions. Reference in this regard may be to the de....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... 51. In this regard, we are benefitted by the judgment of this Court in the case of Ashok Kumar v. Union Territory of Chandigarh [2024 SCC OnLine SC 274] wherein, it has been held that a mere assertion on the part of the State while opposing the plea for anticipatory bail that custodial investigation is required would not be sufficient. The State would have to show or indicate more than prima facie case as to why custodial investigation of the accused is required for the purpose of investigation. 52. Moving further, it must be noted that at the end of the remand period, the 6th ACJM(contemnor-respondent No. 7) entertained an application filed on behalf of the accused-petitioner under Section 437 CrPC and directed his release on bail on furnishing bail bonds. Indisputably, the accused had already furnished bail bonds to the Investigating Officer pursuant to his appearance on 11th December, 2023 and hence, the direction given by the contemnor-respondent No. 7 in requiring the accused to furnish a fresh set of bail bonds for his release from custody was improper and clearly contumacious. The explanation sought to be offered regarding the misconception that had played in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....contemnor-respondent No. 7) dismissed the complaint filed by the petitioner vide order dated 6th January, 2024 which has been rightly reversed by the High Court of Gujarat vide order dated 22nd February, 2024 passed in R/Criminal Revision Application No. 273 of 2024. This conduct of contemnor-respondent No. 7 gives a strong indication of her biased approach in the matter. 55. The arguments advanced by learned senior counsel appearing for the Additional Chief Secretary, Government of Gujarat as well as the High Court of Gujarat about the long-standing practice prevailing in the State, that the Investigating Officer(s) are given liberty to seek police custody remand of the accused after competent Court has granted anticipatory bail does not appeal to us for a moment. Such an interpretation does not appear to be in consonance with the unambiguous position of law. The provisions of anticipatory bail enumerated under Section 438 CrPC or the newly enacted Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023(hereinafter being referred to as 'BNSS'), which has come into force with effect from 1st July, 2024, do not contemplate any such liberty to the Investigating O....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed, in the event of violation of any term, such as absconding, non-cooperating during investigation, evasion, intimidation or inducement to witnesses with a view to influence outcome of the investigation or trial, etc. The court, in this context, is the court which grants anticipatory bail, in the first instance, according to prevailing authorities." (emphasis supplied) 56. The ratio of the above judgment makes it clear that Section 438 CrPC does not compel or oblige courts to impose conditions limiting relief in terms of time, or upon filing of FIR, or recording of statement of any witness, by the police, during investigation or inquiry, etc. The necessity to impose restrictive conditions other than those spelt out in Section 437(3) CrPC would have to be weighed on a case-by-case basis and depending upon the materials produced by the State or the Investigating Agency. Such special or other restrictive conditions may be imposed if the factual context of the case warrants but should not be imposed in a routine manner and the Court would have to act with circumspection depending on the particular facts of each case before endeavouring to impose such conditions. 57. This Court has ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ling to ensure proper installation and maintenance of CCTV cameras in the police station can be made a subject matter of enquiry at a departmental level, if so desired. Thus, the contempt notice issued to contemnor-respondent No. 3, Vijaysinh Gurjar, Deputy Commissioner of Police, Zone-4, Surat, is discharged. 59.3 That the Investigating Officer, contemnor- respondent No. 4, Police Inspector acted in flagrant defiance and gross contempt of this Court's order dated 8th December, 2023 by applying for police custody remand of the petitioner herein. The portrayal made by the Investigating Officer in the remand application to claim that the accused-petitioner was not cooperating in the investigation was totally cooked up and a clear attempt to draw wool over the Court's eyes. During subsistence of this Court's order dated 8th December, 2023, there was neither any authority with the Investigating Officer to seek police custody remand of the accused nor was the prayer for remand justified in the backdrop of the fact that the FIR itself was lodged in relation to a civil dispute which arose from an oral agreement for sale of property. A clear misrepresentation was made in the r....