Teesta Atul Setalvad vs State Of Gujarat

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2023 Supreme(Guj) 841

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
NIRZAR S. DESAI, J.
Teesta Atul Setalvad – Appellant
Versus
State Of Gujarat – Respondent
R/Criminal Misc.Application No. 14435 of 2022
Decided on : 01-07-2023

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : MR MIHIR THAKORE, MR S M VATSA
For the Respondent: MR MINTESH AMIN PUBLIC PROSECUTOR assisted by MR MANAN MEHTA ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR and MR RONAK RAVAL ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

Headnote:
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 439, 173(2) - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 468, 469, 471, 194, 211, 218, 120B, 302, 114, 186, 153A and 187 - Protection of Human Rights Act, 1951 - Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 - Section-13(1)(D)(I), (2) - Grant of bail - Criminal conspiracy - Forgery for purpose of harming reputation - Applicant is seeking release on regular bail – Held, These was done by applicant by influencing, threatening and giving false promises to riot victims and to file false affidavits before various forums including Hon’ble Supreme Court and thereby made attempts to create an atmosphere to unsettle democratically elected government to disrepute image of then Chief Minister and to see that he goes to jail, today some political party is alleged to have given her task to aforesaid things, tomorrow situation may raise that some outside force may utilise and convince a person to make efforts in similar line causing danger to Nation or to a particular State by adopting same modalities and, therefore, considering totality of facts and circumstances as also considering fact that any such attempts may not take place in future, bail application of applicant is required to be dismissed – Application dismissed.

JUDGMENT :

1. By way of this application preferred under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [‘Cr.P.C.’, for short] , the applicant is seeking her release on regular bail in respect of FIR being 1st C.R.No. 11191011220087 of 2022 registered with DCB Crime Branch Police Station, Ahmedabad City for offences punishable under Sections 468, 469, 471, 194, 211, 218 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code.

2.1 The matter was extensively heard on 12.06.2023, 13.06.2023, 14.06.2023, 16.06.2023, 19.06.2023, 20.06.2023 and 21.06.2023 for at least 1 ½ hrs on each day.

2.2 Learned senior advocate Mr.Mihir Thakore with learned advocate Mr.S.M.Vatsa made submissions on behalf of the applicant and learned Public Prosecutor Mr.Mitesh Amin with learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr.Manan Mehta and learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr.Ronak Raval made submissions on behalf of respondent State.

2.3 As the record in the form of charge-sheet papers of this application runs into almost around five thousands pages and though both the learned counsels appearing for respective parties were directed to file brief written submissions, however, learned counsels appearing for both the sides filed lengthy written submissions and therefore, despite the Court knowing fully well that in a bail application the judgment should not be normally lengthy and usually must not discuss evidence on record, considering the lengthy submissions, the Court could not keep the judgment as short as it should have been and as the learned counsel for the applicant has touched certain aspects relating to certain evidence and though the Court is conscious about the fact that at the stage of bail, the evidence need not be discussed, I am constrained to consider certain aspects in this judgment as the submissions made by either sides were such that the Court was required to at least touch those aspects.

3. The brief facts giving rise to filing of the present application are stated as under:

3.1 In the FIR registered by one Mr.D.B.Barad serving as Police Inspector of Crime Branch, Ahmedabad City it is noted that the Hon’ble Supreme Court, in its judgment pronounced on 24.06.2022 in Diary No.34207.2018 (Zakia Ahsan Jafri vs. State of Gujarat and Anr.) inter alia, in para:88, has observed as under:

“88. …. At the end of the day, it appears to us that a coalesced effort of the disgruntled officials of the State of Gujarat alongwith others was to create sensation by making revelations which were alse to their own knowledge. The falsity of their claims had been fully exposed by the SIT after a thorough investigation. Intriguingly, the present proceedings have been pursued for last 16 years (from submissions of complaint dated 8.6.2006 running into 67 pages and then by filing protest petition dated 15.04.2013 running into 514 pages) including with the audacity to question the integrity of every functionary involved in the process of exposing the devious stratagem adopted (to borrow the submission of learned counsel for the SIT), to keep the pot boiling, obviously, for ulterior design. As a matter of fact, all those involved in such abuse of process, need to be in the dock and proceeded with in accordance with law.”

3.2 The said matter pertains to the complaint submitted by Smt.Jakia Nasim Ahsan Jafri dated 08.06.2006 to the Director General of Police, Gujarat State, Police Bhavan, Gandhinagar for the registration of FIR under Section 302 read with Section 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 193 read with Section 114 of the Indian Penal Code, under Sections 186 and 153A, 186 and 187 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 6 of the Commission of Inquiry Act, The Gujarat Police Act and the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1951 wherein the allegations were regarding the incidents which took place in Gujarat as an aftermath of Godhra Train burning incident.

3.3 As per the FIR, after the killing of kar sevaks travelling in Sabarmati Express Train took place at Godhra railway sta