The Supreme Court of India has refused to suspend the life sentence of former Indian Police Service (IPS) officer Sanjiv Bhatt in a custodial death case dating back to 1990. This decision underscores the judiciary's commitment to upholding the rule of law and ensuring accountability for custodial misconduct.
Background of the Case
In October 1990, during a nationwide bandh called by the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) to protest the arrest of BJP leader L.K. Advani during his Rath Yatra, communal tensions escalated in various parts of India, including Gujarat. In Jamjodhpur town of Jamnagar district, clashes erupted, leading to the arrest of 133 individuals by the local police. Among those arrested was Prabhudas Madhavji Vaishnani.
Sanjiv Bhatt, serving as the Assistant Superintendent of Police in Jamnagar at the time, oversaw the arrests. The detainees were allegedly subjected to severe physical abuse while in custody. Vaishnani was released on bail on November 8, 1990, but his health deteriorated rapidly, leading to his death on November 18, 1990. The post-mortem report indicated that his death resulted from acute renal failure and cardio-respiratory arrest, conditions consistent with severe physical trauma.
Legal Proceedings and Conviction
Following Vaishnani's death, his brother lodged a First Information Report (FIR) accusing Bhatt and six other police officers of custodial torture leading to death. The case saw numerous delays, with the Gujarat High Court staying the trial proceedings until 2011. Once the stay was lifted, the trial resumed, culminating in a verdict in June 2019.
The Jamnagar Sessions Court found Bhatt and police constable Pravinsinh Zala guilty under Sections 302 (murder), 323 (voluntarily causing hurt), and 506(1) (criminal intimidation) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), sentencing them to life imprisonment. Five other policemen were convicted under lesser charges related to custodial torture.
Appeals and Supreme Court's Decision
Bhatt and Zala appealed their convictions in the Gujarat High Court, seeking suspension of their sentences. The High Court dismissed their appeals, observing that the trial court's reasoning was sound and that the evidence presented justified the convictions. The court also noted Bhatt's history of misusing legal processes and showing scant respect for judicial proceedings.
Subsequently, Bhatt approached the Supreme Court, seeking suspension of his life sentence. A bench comprising Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta heard the plea. On April 29, 2025, the Supreme Court dismissed Bhatt's application, stating, "We are not inclined to enlarge the appellant on bail." However, the court directed that the hearing of his criminal appeal be expedited.
Implications of the Verdict
The Supreme Court's refusal to suspend Bhatt's life sentence reinforces the principle that custodial torture and deaths are grave offenses warranting stringent punishment. It sends a clear message that law enforcement officials are not above the law and will be held accountable for violations of human rights.
This case also highlights the challenges in prosecuting custodial death cases in India, often marked by delays and procedural hurdles. The judiciary's proactive stance in this instance may set a precedent for more timely and decisive action in similar cases.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court's decision to uphold Sanjiv Bhatt's life sentence in the 1990 custodial death case marks a significant moment in India's legal landscape. It underscores the judiciary's unwavering commitment to justice and the protection of individual rights, even when the accused are members of the law enforcement community. As the legal proceedings continue, this case serves as a reminder of the importance of accountability and the rule of law in a democratic society.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.