Bhatt's bail plea in the 1996 case was rejected by a Palanpur court in Banskantha district on December 7, 2018, against which he moved the high court
The state government has vehemently opposed the bail plea filed by former IPS officer Sanjiv Bhatt, who is presently behind bars in connection with a 22-year-old narcotics case, claiming that the issue is "grave" and the accused might tamper with the evidence, if released. Bhatt's bail plea in the 1996 case was rejected by a Palanpur court in Banskantha district on December 7, 2018, against which he moved the high court.
In an affidavit submitted to the court, the state government has opposed the claim of Bhatt that there cannot be two FIRs in the same case, claiming that the FIR registered in Palanpur is different from the FIR registered in Kota. Bhatt had earlier claimed that he has already moved the Supreme Court against the FIR registered in Kota and he cannot be prosecuted for two FIRs in the same case.
The government has also claimed that the probe agency is yet to find out who placed the 1.15 kg opium in the hotel room in Palanpur in 1996 to allegedly frame Rajasthan-based lawyer Sumer Singh Rajpurohit. The state in its affidavit has also claimed that Bhatt has influenced the probe in the past and releasing him on bail would affect the probe.
It also claimed that Bhatt had earlier violated the bail conditions and went abroad. The state also submitted that the former IPS has criminal antecedents and there are other FIRs pending against him. The affidavit also provides that considering the gravity of the situation, Bhatt should not be granted bail.
As per the case details, the state CID-crime had arrested Bhatt from his house in Ahmedabad on September 5 in connection with this drug planting case. The arrest was made after the Gujarat High Court in June directed the CID to probe the case in which Rajpurohit was booked for allegedly keeping 1.15 kg opium at a Palanpur hotel room in 1996. Bhatt was then superintendent of police of Banaskantha.
Notably, Bhatt had argued before the lower court that the investigation in the case after two decades was an abuse of law. He had also contended that he had been already interrogated in the case and he is not going to abscond as he has deep roots in the society with movable and immovable properties. However, the CID had opposed his bail plea before the lower court arguing that he was the "mastermind" of the offence.
The next hearing of the matter is scheduled on January 15.
‘NO 2 FIRS’
- In an affidavit submitted to court, the state government has opposed the claim of Bhatt there cannot be two FIRs in the same case, claiming that the FIR registered in Palanpur is different from the FIR registered in Kota.
- Bhatt had earlier claimed that he has already moved the Supreme Court against the FIR
){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}
 "Sanjiv Bhatt")
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
)
)
)
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}