Welcome to Scribd. Sign in or start your free trial to enjoy unlimited e-books, audiobooks & documents.Find out more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
4Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
A note on the cases and conduct of Sanjiv Bhatt

A note on the cases and conduct of Sanjiv Bhatt

Ratings: (0)|Views: 1,237|Likes:
Published by Shiv Aroor
A note on the cases and conduct of Shri Sanjiv Bhatt. A document put out by the Gujarat State Government.
A note on the cases and conduct of Shri Sanjiv Bhatt. A document put out by the Gujarat State Government.

More info:

Published by: Shiv Aroor on Oct 05, 2011
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

12/06/2012

pdf

text

original

 
 A note on the cases and conduct of Shri Sanjiv Bhatt
1.
Much undue controversy has been raised by the vested interests on thealleged arrest and harassment of an IPS officer Shri Sanjiv Bhatt. Always the State Government has maintained that the process of law isabove everything and it honours rule of law. The State governmentholds the Hon’ble Courts in high esteem. However, Shri Sanjiv Bhattfor the reasons best known to him has been leveling wild and baselessallegations against the government. It is strange that he, on the onehand wants due process of law should prevail and on the other hand when the same process of law is catching him up, he is alleging all sortsof things which he never disclosed earlier.
2.
 Wild allegations are being made about harassment of Police Officersand registration of false cases. It is strange that nobody is noticing thatno such criminal case has been registered against Shri Sanjiv Bhatt by the Government. Even Shri R. B. Shreekumar retired DGP rank officerand Shri Rahul Sharma DIG rank officer who have been makingstatements against the Chief Minister and the State Government, nosuch complaints have been made by the Government. Hence, thegovernment has nothing to say on the private FIR registered by thePolice.
3.
Shri Sanjiv Bhatt has been in touch with some of the State Congressleaders as his email exchanges disclose. The revelations have soundedtrouble for such people for which the allegations are being leveledagainst the government.
4.
The allegations made against the Chief Minister on alleged illegaldirection on 27-02-2002 after almost 10 years of incidence has already  been investigated by the SIT. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has passedorder on 12
th
September 2011 after considering the SIT reports and the Amicus Curiae’s comments thereon.
5.
The CBI had carried out investigation to the late Shri Haren Pandya’skilling and Shri Sanjiv Bhatt did not found it fit to disclose the allegedkillers name said to have been told to him by an accused Asgar Ali while he was the Jail Superintendent. Now when the Hon’ble GujaratHigh Court is seized of his matter regarding his atrocities on hundredsof people at Jam khambalia in Jamnagar district, he is coming out witha wild disclosure.
6.
Shri K. D. Panth is a Police Constable in the Police Department inGujarat. He had been cited by Shri Sanjiv Bhatt, suspended IPS officerof Gujarat cadre as witness to his alleged presence in the meeting at theChief Minister’s residence on 27-02-2002. Shri Sanjiv Bhatt took Shri
Page | 1
 
K. D. Panth before the SIT looking in to the complaint of Mrs. Zakia Ahesan Jaffrey and
suo motu
produced him as his witness.
7.
Later on Shri Panth recollected that he was not present in the Stateduring the time when the said alleged meeting was held on 27-02-2002. He recollected the fact that he along with his relatives had goneto Mumbai on 25.02.2002 & returned to Gandhinagar on 28.02.2002.Shri K. D. Panth wrote to the SIT about the facts and wanted correct hisstand.
8.
However, on 16-06-2011Shri Sanjiv Bhatt coaxed Shri KD Panth tomeet him as his statement is required for strengthening his case fordemand for security cover. When Shri Panth along with one ShriShrenik Shah met Shri Sanjiv Bhatt, he was taken before a Notary inthe midnight and forced him to make an affidavit.
9.
Shri K. D. Panth realizing that he has been duped and coerced by ShriSanjiv Bhatt, immediately on 17.06.2011 filed an affidavit before theExecutive Magistrate, Gandhinagar narrating about the facts andincident which took place in the night intervening 16.06.2011 &17.06.2001.
10.
Regarding this incident Shri Panth lodged a complaint in GhatlodiaPolice Station vide I. C. R. No. 149/2011 on 22.06.2011.
11.
In this connection Shri Panth’s statement under section 161 of CrPC was recorded by the Investigation Officer Shri N. C. Patel, under videography at his own request. Later on he recorded his statement before Ld. Additional Senior Civil Judge, Ahmedabad Rural atMirjapur Court u/s 164 CrPC on 30.06.2011.
12.
I.O. of this offence has also recorded the statement of witness of thiscase namely Shrenik Shah. This witness also gave evidence undersection 164 CrPC before the Ld. Additional Senior Civil Judge, Ahmedabad Rural at Mirjapur Court.
13.
Mr. Shrenik Shah who is a witness in this case of Ghatlodia PoliceStation I.C.R. No. 149/11 was threatened to compel Shri KD Panth to withdraw the FIR or face dire consequences. Hence, a case u/s 507 of I.P.C. was also registered by Shri Shrenik Shah in Chandkheda PoliceStation bearing C.R. No.II 3177/11 0n 23.07.11.
14.
 As a part of investigation Shri Sanjiv Bhatt was summoned u/s 160 of Cr.P.C.to remain present before the Investigation Officer. Firstsummons was issued on 12.08.2011 to appear before I.O. on24.08.2011. 2nd summons was issued on 25.08.2011 for 02.09.2011.3rd summons issued on 02.09.2011 to remain present on 19.09.2011.4th summons was issued on 20.09.2011 to remain present on30.09.2011. He has not remained present on any of the date given tohim, stating various reasons. He sent communication in respect of last
Page | 2
 
summons stating that as he has to remain present before the JusticeNanavati & Justice Mehta Commission it is not possible for him toremain present on 30.09.2011. It was inquired in the office of theJustice Nanavati & Justice Mehta Commission of Inquiry; and foundthat he has not been asked by the commission to remain present beforethe commission on 30.09.2011. It transpires from the above fact he isavoiding the summons and inquiry process, hence it was felt that torecord his statement his arrest was the only step that the Investigationofficer has taken.
15.
This case being investigated by the concerned Police Officer where thecase has been registered and detained Shri Sanjiv Bhatt as part of investigation on 30-09-2011. Search warrants were issued by theInvestigation Officer on 30-09-2011 and on 01-10-2011. It is allegedthat his house was ransacked during the search which is baseless andfalse as search was carried out as per law and under videography.
16.
Shri Sanjiv Bhatt filed a petition in the Supreme Court under Article 32of the Constitution of India praying for transfer of an offence registeredas C.R.No.I 149 of 2011 which is filed as private offence independently  by Shri K.D. Panth. It is a settled position in law that extraordinary constitutional jurisdiction of the Hon’ble Court under Article 32 of theConstitution of India would be sparingly invoked and normally, alitigant should approach the jurisdictional High Court invoking its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Shri Sanjiv Bhatt has neither approached the Hon’ble High Court invoking its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India nor has heassigned any reasons shown as to why he cannot move the Hon’bleHigh Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
17.
Further, the facts stated and the grounds raised do not even remotely  justify the petitioner invoking the jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Courtunder Article 32 of the Constitution of India as none of hisfundamental rights are violated. There is certain startling and shockingfact which shows that Shri Sanjiv Bhatt is guilty of suppressing mostmaterial facts and making incorrect statement and even submittingfabricated document on oath. The copy of the office order mentioningrewards given to Shri K. D. Panth by the present petitioner as annexedin his petition is fabricated and words have been inserted deliberately though the actual order is different.
18.
The investigation into the riot cases of the year 2002 is completed by the SIT and the trials are going on strictly in accordance with the orderpassed by this Honorable Court dated 1st May 2009 in Writ Petition(Criminal) No.109 of 2003. So far as the complaint of Smt. ZakiaNaseem Ahesan Jaffrey dated 8th June 2006 is concerned, the said
Page | 3

Activity (4)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
1 hundred reads
1 thousand reads
Haneefa Rahma liked this
Jagdish Trivedi liked this

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->