LexTUSHARBHAI RAJNIKANTBHAI SHAH versus KAMAL DAYANI & ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2024] 8 S.C.R. 235 : 2024 INSC 588 Tusharbhai Rajnikantbhai Shah v. Kamal Dayani & Ors. Contempt Petition (C) D. No. 1106 of 2024 In (Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 14489 of 2023) 07 August 2024 [B.R. Gavai and Sandeep Mehta, JJ.] Issue for Consideration Accused-petitioner was granted absolute interim protection of anticipatory bail by Supreme Court, until modified or altered upon final disposal of the present SLP which was pending consideration before this Court. However, in gross violation of the said order, the petitioner was remanded to police custody during the currency of the aforesaid interim order. Present contempt petition filed by the petitioner against the respondents-police officials and the ACJM. Respondents, if committed contempt of this Court’s order. Headnotes† Contempt of Court – When – Accused-petitioner was remanded to police custody during the currency of the interim order passed by Supreme Court granting anticipatory bail to him – Contempt petition filed by the petitioner against the respondents (the police officials and the ACJM) for wilful disobedience and contempt of the Court’s order: Held: There was no such stipulation in the order under contempt dtd. 08.12.2023 which was passed exercising jurisdiction u/Article 136 of the Constitution of India that the accused could be remanded to police custody – The portrayal made by the Investigating Officer (IO)-contemnor-respondent No. 4 in the remand application to claim that the petitioner was not cooperating in the investigation was totally cooked up – During subsistence of the order dtd. 08.12.2023, there was neither any authority with the IO 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 – There was neither bona fide nor genuine need for grant of police custody of the petitioner – Thus, respondent No.4, acted 236 [2024] 8 S.C.R. Digital Supreme Court Reports in flagrant defiance and gross contempt of the aforesaid order by applying for police custody remand of the petitioner – Further, the ACJM-contemnor-respondent No.7 also acted with bias and in a high-handed manner while granting police custody remand of the accused – The SLP filed on behalf of the petitioner had not been finally decided and was still pending adjudication, when the remand application was entertained and hence, there was no occasion for her to have proceeded to interpret this Court’s order in a fanciful manner and that too while acting on a tainted remand application filed by the IO – The reason offered by her that she was acting under a misconception owing to settled and prevailing practice in the State of Gujarat, is in disregard to the order passed by this Court – Order under contempt allowed only one interpretation i.e. the petitioner had to be released on bail in the event of arrest – The action of the respondent No.7 in granting police custody remand of the petitioner and in failing to release him upon completion of the said period is clearly in teeth of this Court’s order dtd. 08.12.2023 and tantamounts to contempt – Respondent No. 7’s contumacious actions also contributed to the illegal detention of the petitioner for almost 48 hours after the period of police remand had come to an end – Detention of the accused till 18.12.23 was unconstitutional and contrary to the letter and spirit of Articles 20 and 21 – Respondent Nos.4 and 7 guilty of committing contempt of this Court’s order dtd. 08.12.2023. [Paras 45-47, 59.3, 59.4, 60] Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.438 – Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 – s.482 – Anticipatory bail – Investigating Officer (IO), if has the liberty to seek police custody remand of the accused after anticipatory bail has been granted by the competent Court – Plea of the Government of Gujarat and the High Court of Gujarat about such long-standing practice prevailing in the State of Gujarat: Held: Power to grant anticipatory bail is to be exercised with a great degree of circumspection and not in a routine manner – Once, a Court exercises such power bearing in mind the strict parameters applicable to grant of anticipatory bail, then giving a handle to the IO to seek police custody remand of the accused, would virtually negate and frustrate the very purpose behind the order of anticipatory
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.