Legal tangle over court order denying Sanjiv Bhatt's custodial interrogation

A tough legal battle has occurred after the suspended IPS officer Sanjiv Bhatt's arrest and the subsequent refusal of the magistrate court's order to allow his custodial interrogation by the police. The State Government has appointed Gujarat High Court's senior lawyer, S V Raju, to oppose Bhatt's bail plea.

Interesting part is that, both the parties are opposing each other on the basis of their views on whether or not a higher court can hear an appeal against a magistrate court's order in the matter of remand of an accused.

Two major developments have taken place after Bhatt's arrest. Bhatt has filed a petition seeking for his release bail; the government has challenged the magistrate court's order refusing the police custody of the IPS officer.

Bhatt's lawyer, Saiyad has contended that the government cannot file a revision petition against the magistrate's court order. The state government, on the other hand, has filed an application stating that the court cannot proceed with the hearing of the bail plea as its revision application seeking Bhatt's custody on police remand is pending.

Saiyad, while opposing the revision application, argued that the issue is whether the order of the magistrate court regarding remand can be challenged in higher courts.

Saiyad argued that the issue is pending before the high court for final decision. Till the issue is finally decided by the larger bench, the court has specifically directed the subordinate courts to adjourn the cases.

Meanwhile, Judge VK Vyas, heard Bhatt's bail plea on Tuesday, appearing on behalf of the state, SV Raju opposed the IPS officer's bail plea.

News reported by AR for newsvision

No compromise: Sanjeev Bhatt rejects terms set for bail

The Ahmedabad Sessions Court today reserved the order on Gujarat government's remand revision petition of arrested IPS officer, Sanjay Bhatt, for October 7. Decision on his bail plea has been postponed till tomorrow.

On Monday, the State Government challenged in the Sessions Court here, a magisterial court order of denying remand of Bhatt, arrested for allegedly threatening and forcing a constable to sign a false affidavit.

During the hearing Bhatt's lawyer, Sayed contended that the revision remand application of the state government was not maintainable in law. He cited the Supreme Court judgment which said that granting or rejecting of remand was an interlocutory order and there cannot be revision of that order as per Sec. 397 (2) of CrPC.

Sayed said in view of the judgment of the apex court that the government application is not maintainable and it should be rejected.

Appearing for the government, the Public Prosecutor Pravin Trivedi argued that the state government has the right to seek revision of the remand once it is rejected.

After the reverse of the order, Bhatt who was present in the court told the judge that he would like to present it and would also like to be present during the pronouncement of the order. But he was told that his presence was not required. The judge also asked the jail authorities not to bring Bhatt on October 7.

The court proposed to Bhatt that if he went on remand for three hours and came back, it would readily grant him bail. However, Bhatt refused to take this proposal and said he cannot compromise with "touts".

He told the court that whatever wrongs the government wants to do, he will not care and rather he will tolerate it.

He was arrested on September 30 in connection with an FIR filed against him by police constable K D Pant in June for allegedly threatening him and making him sign false affidavits regarding a meeting called by Chief Minister Narendra Modi on February 27, 2002.

The government contended that Bhatt's custody was required to find out about others who were involved in the conspiracy, and also to ascertain whether the IPS officer had sent the affidavits to somebody using e-mails.

The government further said that it also wanted to know how many bank lockers did Bhatt had and what was inside them.

Bhatt had filed for bail in the Sessions Court, which will be heard later in the day.

News Reported by  AR for Newsvision newspaper