‘It seems Gujarat follows different laws’, says Supreme Court; contempt notice issued to police officials and judicial magistrate

New Delhi, January 10

The Supreme Court on Wednesday issued contempt of court notice to certain Gujarat police officials and a judicial magistrate in Surat for sending a businessman to police custody, ignoring its order granting him anticipatory bail.

Terming it as “grossest of contempt”, a Bench of Justice BR Gavai and Justice Sandeep Mehta issued contempt notices to the additional chief secretary of the state’s home department, Surat commissioner of police, deputy commissioner of police, inspector of Vesu Police Station and the additional chief judicial magistrate concerned and ordered them to be present before it on January 29.

“It seems Gujarat follows different laws. It’s happening in the diamond capital of the world. This is pure violation of our orders. Let the magistrate and the investigating officer come and explain how the remand orders were passed. We will direct the DGP to send the contemnors to Sabarmati jail or somewhere else. Let them come on January 29 and explain to us (the reasons for remand) in an affidavit. This is the grossest of contempt,” said the Bench—which had granted anticipatory bail to Tusharbhai Rajnikantbhai Shah of Surat in a cheating case.

“Let this be corrected in some manner. The IO and the magistrate must learn some lessons from this. We will issue contempt notice to the magistrate also. Is this the way they deal with the Supreme Court’s order?… Ask everyone to come on January 29 bags and baggage. We will decide on January 29 what needs to be done with them,” Justice Gavai told ASG SV Raju who represented the Gujarat Government.

The Bench was visibly upset when told that the businessman was remanded to police custody and allegedly threatened and beaten up to extort Rs 1.65 crore from him in the presence of the complainant.

“How could the petitioner be taken into custody in violation of the court’s order? How could the IO (Investigating Officer) dare to seek remand of the petitioner?” it asked.

On behalf of Shah, senior counsel Iqbal H Syed said has filed an application with the commissioner of police to preserve the CCTV footage of Surat’s Vesu police station from December 13 till December 16, 2023, when the petitioner was in police custody.

As the Bench asked Raju about the CCTV footage, the ASG said the cameras weren’t working.

“This was expected. It’s intentional. The cameras may not have been working for those four days. The police may not have marked his (Shah) presence in the police station diary. This is sheer abuse of power. In a crime of civil nature, why was remand required? Was there a murder weapon which was to be recovered?” Justice Mehta wondered.

Justice Gavai asked when the Supreme Court had on December 8, 2023 granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, how was the remand order passed and Shah taken into custody.

Raju tried to defuse the situation and apologised to the bench, acknowledging that the investigating officer had committed a blunder.

“What has happened is gross. It was four-day illegal custody. Let the magistrate and the IO be inside for four days,” the Bench said angrily.