New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Wednesday held the police inspector of Vesu Police Station, Surat, Gujarat and Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Surat, guilty of contempt of court for arresting and remanding an accused, and ignoring an interim anticipatory bail order passed by the apex court.
A bench comprising Justices B R Gavai and Sandeep Mehta, in an order, said: "It is directed that R.Y. Raval, Police Inspector, Vesu Police Station, Surat (Contemnor-respondent No.4) and Deepaben Sanjaykumar Thakar, 6th Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Surat (Contemnor-respondent No.7) are directed to remain present in this court on 02nd September 2024 and address the court on the quantum of sentence".
The bench said having considered the role attributed to contemnor-respondent No. 2, the Commissioner of Police, Surat, we find that there is not even a whisper of an allegation against the said officer other than the aspect relating to the non-functioning of the CCTV cameras at the Vesu Police Station.
The bench said the commissioner cannot be held responsible for the non-compliance/contempt of its order dated 8th December 2023 and hence, the contempt notice issued to the contemnor-respondent No.2 i.e, Ajay Kumar Tomar, Commissioner of Police, Surat, is discharged.
The bench said the contemnor-respondent No.3, Deputy Commissioner, Surat, is not directly responsible for non-compliance of its order.
"However, his role in failing 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," it said.
However, the bench said the investigating officer, contemnor-respondent No. 4, police inspector acted in flagrant defiance and gross contempt of this court's order by applying for police custody remand of the petitioner herein.
The bench said the portrayal made by the 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," noted the bench.
The bench said the explanation offered by 6th ACJM that the order dated 13th December 2023 granting police custody remand of the petitioner was passed in the bona fide exercise of jurisdiction, based on a genuine misunderstanding of the legal position does not appeal to us.
"In view of the findings recorded in preceding paras, it is clear that contemnor-respondent No. 7 acted with bias and in a high-handed manner while granting police custody remand of the accused. The reason offered by her that she was acting under a misconception owing to settled and 5 prevailing practice in the State of Gujarat, is clearly in disregard to the order passed by this Court. The said plea does not hold water since the order under contempt dated 8th December 2023 allowed only one interpretation i.e. the accused-petitioner had to be released on bail in the event of arrest," said the bench.
The bench said, "As a result of the above discussion, we hold R.Y. Raval, Police Inspector, Vesu Police Station, Surat(contemnor-respondent No.4) and Deepaben Sanjaykumar Thakar, 6th Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Surat(contemnor-respondent No.7) guilty of having committed contempt of this Court’s order dated 8th December, 2023."
The apex court had granted anticipatory bail to Surat resident Tusharbhai Rajnikantbhai Shah in a cheating case. The court was informed that the businessman was remanded in police custody, and allegedly threatened to extort Rs 1.65 crore from him in the presence of the complainant.
Tusharbhai moved the apex court after the Gujarat High Court denied him bail. On December 8, 2023, while issuing notice on his petition, the apex court granted him interim anticipatory bail with the condition that he should continue to cooperate with the investigation.
The petitioner said he was served with a notice on December 12, 2023, directing him to remain present before the magistrate in response to the police's custody application. The Magistrate remanded him to police custody for four days till December 16. The petitioner alleged that in police custody, he was threatened and beaten. On January 10 this year, the apex court issued notice to police officials and a judicial magistrate of Surat.
