Sanjiv Bhatt Challenges Custodial Torture Charges in Gujarat High Court Amidst Ongoing Life Sentence

Ahmedabad, India – Former Indian Police Service (IPS) officer Sanjiv Bhatt has initiated a new legal battle in the Gujarat High Court, filing a criminal revision application to challenge an order from a Jamnagar sessions court that mandates the framing of charges against him in a decades-old custodial torture case. This development adds another complex layer to the ongoing legal saga of the controversial ex-officer, who is already serving a life sentence for the murder of a detainee connected to the same incident.

The current plea, heard by Justice R.T. Vachchani on October 15, 2025, specifically targets a June 2025 decision by the Jamnagar sessions court. That court had overturned a 2024 order from a magistrate court which had discharged Bhatt in the custodial torture matter. The sessions court’s reversal directed the magistrate to proceed with framing charges against Bhatt and other former police officials, prompting Bhatt to seek intervention from the High Court.

During the recent hearing, the High Court adjourned the matter to December 8, 2025, at the request of Bhatt's counsel. However, Justice Vachchani made a crucial clarification, stating, "It is made clear that the pendency of this application shall not come in the way of the concerned Court in executing the sentence under the provisions of Section 418 of the Criminal Procedure Code and Section 458 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, in accordance with law." This directive underscores that Bhatt's ongoing life imprisonment for murder will not be stayed or affected by this separate procedural challenge concerning the torture allegations.

---

Background: The Custodial Death of Prabhudas Vaishnani

The legal proceedings against Bhatt stem from an incident in 1990 during a 'Bharat Bandh'. At the time, Bhatt, serving as the Assistant Superintendent of Police in Jamnagar, led the detention of approximately 133 individuals, including one Prabhudas Madhavji Vaishnani, for alleged rioting. Following his release, Vaishnani was hospitalized and subsequently died, with allegations surfacing that his death was a direct result of severe torture inflicted while in police custody.

This single incident has spawned two distinct but interconnected legal tracks against Bhatt:

1. The Murder Conviction: A case was pursued specifically for the death of Vaishnani. In June 2019, a Jamnagar sessions court found Bhatt and another police constable, Pravinsinh Zala, guilty of murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), along with charges under Sections 323 (voluntarily causing hurt) and 506(1) (criminal intimidation). Both were sentenced to life imprisonment. This conviction was subsequently upheld by the Gujarat High Court in early 2024, and the Supreme Court of India refused to suspend Bhatt's sentence in April 2025, solidifying his incarceration.

2. The Custodial Torture Case: The present revision application pertains to a broader case of custodial torture involving the detainees from the 1990 incident. While intrinsically linked to Vaishnani's death, this case focuses on the act of torture itself as a separate offence. It was in this matter that a magistrate court granted Bhatt a discharge in 2024, likely finding insufficient grounds to proceed. However, the prosecution challenged this discharge, leading the sessions court to rule that there was a prima facie case and that charges must be framed.

---

Legal Analysis: The Nuances of Discharge and Framing of Charges

Bhatt's current challenge in the High Court revolves around the critical legal distinction between a discharge and an acquittal. A discharge, typically sought before the framing of charges, argues that the evidence presented by the prosecution is so fundamentally weak that it fails to establish a prima facie case against the accused. If successful, it ends the proceedings against that individual at a nascent stage.

The sessions court's decision to quash the discharge and order the framing of charges signifies its belief that the prosecution has presented sufficient material to warrant a full trial. By approaching the High Court with a revision application (R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 1946 of 2025), Bhatt’s legal team is arguing that the sessions court erred in its assessment and that the magistrate's initial order for discharge was legally sound.

Legal experts note that this is a significant procedural battle. The outcome will determine whether Bhatt must face a new trial for custodial torture, even as he serves a life sentence for murder arising from the same set of circumstances. The principle against double jeopardy would not apply here, as murder (Sec 302 IPC) and custodial torture or voluntarily causing hurt (Sec 323 IPC) are distinct offences with different legal ingredients, even if they originate from the same transaction.

The High Court's order also included a reference to "Section 458 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita" alongside Section 418 of the CrPC regarding the execution of his sentence. This reference is noteworthy, as the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) is the successor to the IPC, not the CrPC. The new code for criminal procedure is the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS). The court's mention may be a forward-looking statement or a clerical notation, but it confirms the judicial intent that Bhatt's existing sentence is to be executed without impediment, regardless of changes in legal codes.

Implications for Police Accountability

The Sanjiv Bhatt case has long been a focal point in discussions on police accountability, human rights, and the rule of law in India. His initial conviction for custodial death was a landmark moment, as such convictions of senior police officers are relatively rare. This new chapter, focused on the procedural question of framing charges for torture, keeps the spotlight on the legal system's handling of alleged state-sanctioned violence.

As the matter is now set to be heard again in December, the legal community will be closely watching the Gujarat High Court's examination of the sessions court's order. The High Court's decision will not only impact Sanjiv Bhatt's legal future but also contribute to the jurisprudence surrounding custodial violence and the threshold of evidence required to proceed to trial against law enforcement officials.