The Gujarat High Court has rejected the pleas filed by the former IPS officer Sanjiv Bhatt who sought transfer of his trial in a 1996 drug seizure case to another judge. The High Court has observed that he is a serial abuser of the legal process.

The said IPS officer under Article 227 of the Constitution read with Section 407 of the Cr.PC. challenged the order passed by the Principal District and Sessions Judge seeking transfer of his case to the Court of senior-most Additional Sessions Judge at Palanpur.

A Single Bench of Justice Samir Dave held, “This shows that the Petitioner is a serial abuser of the legal process. He has scant regard for the judicial process. By applying his knowledge of administration of criminal law system in a negative way, he has been trying to cripple down the said system itself when it comes to system deciding the offences committed by the Petitioner through a fair trial. This tendency has a far-reaching effect on the very existence of criminal justice delivery system. If such practices are entertained or ignored the same will become a norm and a precedent which will entail wide scaling ramifications on the administration of justice.”

The Bench also turned down a request by the counsel for the petitioner to stay the proceedings for a month.

Senior Advocate Mihir Joshi with Yash K. Dave represented the applicant while Advocate H.R. Prajapati represented the original complainant and Public Prosecutor Mitesh Amin with APP J.K. Shah represented the State.

Facts of the Case -

In the month of June this year, Bhatt, who was in prison, had filed a petition before the Principal District and Sessions Judge of Banaskantha to transfer his trial from the presiding judge to the senior most Additional Sessions Judge. He claimed that the judge, serving as the special judge for NDPS (Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances) cases in Banaskantha district, was biased against him.When the Sessions Court of Banaskantha dismissed his plea, he approached the High Court and sought to quash the order of the principal judge and to secure an order from to transfer his trial to another judge.

Both the State Government as well as the drug case victim, who was a practicing lawyer from Rajasthan, opposed the pleas saying these had come at the fag-end of the trial and were filed in order to delay the trial. Bhatt, who was sacked from the force in 2015, was a superintendent of police in a district when Rajasthan-based lawyer was held in 1996 after drugs were seized from the hotel room in which he was staying. However, the Rajasthan police later said the lawyer was falsely implicated by the Banaskantha police to compel him to transfer a disputed property located at Pali in Rajasthan. Bhatt was then arrested by Gujarat police in that case in 2018. During the pendency of this trial, he was convicted in a custodial death case.

The High Court after considering the submissions of the counsel noted, “This court is also in agreement with the argument canvassed by the state as well as the victim that having not received favorable orders from the Trial Court, the Petitioner turned around and started making baseless allegations against the presiding judge himself. All of this was done to ensure that the final arguments in the case do not start. This Court is of the view that this is not the first time the Petitioner has indulged in such kind of practice affecting the very administration of justice.”

The Court added that the same modus operandi was adopted by the petitioner, wherein, he made scandalous allegations against the presiding judge of that case in an attempt to impede and protract the trial. It further said that Bhatt cannot be permitted to endlessly file frivolous applications to indefinitely delay the conclusion of the trial.

The Court further remarked, “Requirement of cooperation in the trial does not mean that the accused would intimidate, browbeat, scandalize and pressurize either the court or the prosecution to conduct the trial as per his wish and whims.”

The Court held that the petitioner has failed to establish any case of bias and the proceedings alleging bias is nothing but an attempt to scandalize and pressurize the court.

“The learned presiding judge is thus again directed to conclude the trial within the time frame as fixed by the coordinated bench in C.R.A. No. 301 of 2021 without giving any opportunity to any party to resort to any dilatory tactics. This attempt of the petitioner deserves to be deprecated strongly so that no litigant resort to such baseless and unfounded allegations against the system of administration of justice and to ensure that every court can function fearlessly and impartially”, concluded the Court.

Accordingly, the High Court dismissed the special criminal application.

Cause Title- Sanjiv Rajendrabhai Bhatt v. State of Gujarat

Click here to read/download the Judgment

Gujarat High CourtJustice Samir J. DaveNDPS Case

Swasti Chaturvedi