Police fail to get his custody; Bhatt is lodged where he was once a superintendent.
Ahmedabad police suffered a setback at the very first stage of the legal battle with Sanjiv Bhatt though the whistleblower IPS officer was sent to the same Sabarmati jail where he was once superintendent.
The local magistrate on Saturday refused to grant the police the seven-day police custody they had sought for Bhatt who was arrested on Friday on charges of illegal confinement and forging documents.
Judicial magistrate BG Doshi rejected the petition filed by the Ghatlodia police seeking Bhatt on seven-day police remand for interrogation and sent the IPS officer to Sabarmati jail. Bhatt was chief superintendent of the jail in 2004. Talking to DNA, Bhatt's lawyer IH Saiyed said: "The court discussed all grounds furnished by the police and found them not sufficient to send Bhatt to police custody."
Bhatt will have to remain in jail at least till Monday when his lawyers will move a bail application before the competent court. The police are likely to challenge the magistrate court's order in its superior court on Monday itself. Bhatt was arrested on Friday evening on a complaint filed by KD Panth, former assistant intelligence officer in the state Intelligence Bureau. Panth had alleged that Bhatt had forced him to file an affidavit to be submitted before the Supreme Court's amicus curies Raju Ramchandran.
He had alleged that Bhatt, who was his higher officer in state IB in 2002, had intimidated him and forged his affidavit. Ghatlodia police produced Bhatt before the magistrate late on Saturday afternoon and sought his custody on seven-day police remand.
District government pleader Pravin Trivedi sought his remand on the ground that the police had to find out the others who were involved in forging the affidavit and where else Bhatt had used the affidavit. The police also had to check his bank lockers and computers for further investigation, Trivedi argued. Meanwhile, the police also sought the court's consent to add the harsher and non-bailable Section 194 of IPC in the FIR against Bhatt. The section is non-bailable and it accuses a person of fabricating evidence to falsely implicate a person in a case in which the maximum punishment is death. However, Bhatt's lawyers IH Saiyad and Mahesh Baria strongly protested against this and pleaded to the court not to allow the police to add this section.
Saiyad termed the action of the police as a 'mockery' and 'abuse' of the process of law. "Bhatt has already moved a petition before the Supreme Court with the plea that this case be transferred out of Gujarat or investigated by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). The Supreme Court has also issued notices to the state government which has not filed a reply yet," Saiyad said.
Bhatt's counsel further alleged that the state government had deliberately chosen September 30 as the date of arrest so that Bhatt cannot get any legal protection. "Bhatt was arrested when the Supreme Court went on 10 days vacation," Saiyad said. "The police have no prima facie evidence to show Bhatt's involvement in the case. The police had sought his remand on frivolous grounds and the investigating officer should be cautioned for his act," Saiyad had argued.
"Bhatt should actually be provided protection by the court as he is an important witness in the complaint filed by Jakia Jafri against chief minister and 61 others. The Supreme Court has directed the local magistrate to decide on her petition," Saiyed had said.
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
)
)
)
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}