{"id":212587,"date":"2011-05-12T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2011-05-11T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sit-vs-samima-on-12-may-2011"},"modified":"2018-04-13T13:29:06","modified_gmt":"2018-04-13T07:59:06","slug":"sit-vs-samima-on-12-may-2011","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sit-vs-samima-on-12-may-2011","title":{"rendered":"Sit vs Samima on 12 May, 2011"},"content":{"rendered":"
Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n
Sit vs Samima on 12 May, 2011<\/div>\n
Author: Jayant Patel,&Nbsp;Honble Kumari,&Nbsp;<\/div>\n
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System \n\n  \n  \n    \n\n \n \n    \t      \n         \n\t    \n\t\t   Print\n\t\t\t\t          \n\n  \n\n\n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t\n\n\n \n\n\n\t \n\nCR.MA\/15981\/2010\t 14\/ 14\tORDER \n \n \n\n\t\n\n \n\nIN\nTHE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\nCRIMINAL\nMISC.APPLICATION No. 15981 of 2010\n \n\nIn\n\n\n \n\nCRIMINAL\nMISC.APPLICATION No. 9832 of 2010\n \n\nIn\n\n\n \n\nSPECIAL\nCRIMINAL APPLICATION No. 1850 of 2009\n \n\n \n \n=========================================================\n\n \n\nSIT\n- THRO' KARNAL SINGH - IPS - Applicant(s)\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nSAMIMA\nKAUSAR WD\/O MOHMMED SHAMIM RAZA & 4 - Respondent(s)\n \n\n=========================================================\n \nAppearance\n: \nMR\nYOGESH S LAKHANI for\nApplicant(s) : 1,\n \n\nMR MUKUL\nSINGHA for Respondent No.1-2 \nNone for Respondent(s) : 1 - 2, 5, \nMR\nKAMAL TRIVEDI, LD ADVOCATE GENERAL WITH MR P.K. JANI, LD. GOVT.\nPLEADER ASSISTED BY MS SANGEETA VISHEN AGP for Respondent(s) : 3, \nMR\nPS CHAMPANERI, LD ASSTT SOLICITOR GENERAL  for Respondent(s) :\n4, \n=========================================================\n\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nCORAM\n\t\t\t: \n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nHONOURABLE\n\t\t\tMR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL\n\t\t\n\t\n\t \n\t\t \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nand\n\t\t\n\t\n\t \n\t\t \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nHON'BLE\n\t\t\tSMT. JUSTICE ABHILASHA KUMARI\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n \n\n\n \n\nDate\n: 12\/05\/2011 \n\n \n\n \n \nORAL\nORDER<\/pre>\n
(Per
\n: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL)<\/p>\n
This
\n\tCourt, on 21.4.2011, had passed the following order:-\n<\/p>\n
“1.As
\n\tper the order dated 08.04.2011 passed by this Court,  all the
\n\treports have been submitted.  We have gone through the reports and
\n\thave considered the contents thereof.  Since the investigation is at
\n\ta crucial stage, we find that the contents of the reports are not
\n\trequired to be recorded since to do so would prejudice the
\n\tinvestigation.\n<\/p>\n
2.However, three pertinent aspects are
\n\trequired to be recorded qua each member of SIT.  One is that Mr.
\n\tKarnail Singh, Chairman of the SIT, who has been posted at Mizoram,
\n\thas shown his inability to continue with the present assignment.  We
\n\thave gone through his report and we find that the difficulty being
\n\tfaced by him appears to be genuine.  Of course, he has also stated
\n\tother aspects in the report which, if required, shall be considered
\n\tat a later stage. Under these circumstances, we allow Mr.Karnail
\n\tSingh to be relieved as Chairman of SIT. Since we may be required to
\n\tinduct another member as SIT who may be the Chairman, or otherwise,
\n\tas per his seniority in the IPS cadre, we keep that aspect open. It
\n\tis directed that the Union of India, through Mr.P.S. Champaneri, on
\n\tthe next date, shall communicate names of other officers who may be
\n\tspared for inclusion in the present SIT.\n<\/p>\n
3.The second aspect is that on account
\n\tof the non- availability of the Chairman, SIT shall now comprise of
\n\ttwo members, namely, Mr.Mohan Jha and Mr. Satish Verma.\n<\/p>\n
4.We have seen the individual report
\n\tof both the members and we find that there are various differences
\n\tof opinion in the mode and manner of investigation.  Further, we
\n\thave seen from the report that if there is no separate demarcation
\n\tof duties, it may hamper the smooth investigation.  Therefore, we
\n\tfind it proper to demarcate the duties of both the members of SIT.
\n\tHowever, it is clarified that the demarcation of duties by this
\n\tCourt may not be taken to mean that there is a perception that any
\n\tofficer is either working properly or not working properly.
\n\tHowever, demarcation of duties is essential with a view to
\n\tstreamline the investigation without any impediment therein.\n<\/p>\n
5.We have heard both the members of
\n\tthe SIT. Considering the facts and circumstances and having gone
\n\tthrough the reports submitted by the members of SIT including
\n\tChairman, Mr. Karnail Singh, we find that the investigation through
\n\tSIT shall be looked after in the following manner:\n<\/p>\n
Mr.Mohan
\n\tJha shall look after the administrative work being member of SIT.\n<\/p>\n
Mr.Satish
\n\tVerma shall look after the actual and further investigation of the
\n\tcase which is already stated vide order dated 08.04.2011 at
\n\tparagraph no.7, i.e., pertaining to complaint being C.R.No.8\/04
\n\tdated 05.06.2004 registered with DCB Police Station, Ahmedabad.\n<\/p>\n
6.Hence, SIT shall work accordingly.\n<\/p>\n
7.It was submitted by Mr.Lakhani,
\n\tamicus curiae on behalf of SIT that since no officer of the rank of
\n\tSP\/DIG level is available, it would help the member of SIT to
\n\tfurther investigate the matter if such an officer is spared by the
\n\tState Police Department.  We leave  it to the discretion and
\n\tdecision of the member of SIT who has been assigned with the work of
\n\tinvestigation.  If he finds it proper, he may requisition the
\n\tofficer of his choice who is not connected with the incident
\n\tdirectly or indirectly. Upon the requisition being made by him, the
\n\tState Government shall spare that officer for assisting the member
\n\tof SIT for investigation.\n<\/p>\n
8.It has been further stated that the
\n\treport of the Central Forensic Laboratory as well as AIIMS may take
\n\tsome time, approximately four weeks. An attempt shall be made by
\n\trequisitioning both the authorities to submit the reports earlier,
\n\tpreferably within a period of two weeks, if possible.  The order of
\n\tthis Court shall be communicated to the Central Forensic Laboratory
\n\tas well as AIIMS.\n<\/p>\n
9.Another aspect which we need to
\n\trecord is that when we passed the order dated 08.04.2011, it was
\n\talready mentioned that SIT had requisitioned transfer of certain
\n\tofficers including Mr.P.P. Pandey, Mr.G.L. Singhal and Mr.Tarun
\n\tBarot pursuant to our order dated 28.01.2011.  In spite of the
\n\trequisition made by SIT, the said officers were not transferred by
\n\tthe State Government.  There are certain materials which, prima
\n\tfacie, suggest that this has affected the investigation.  Not only
\n\tthat, after the order dated 08.04.2011 was passed by this Court, the
\n\tState Government was required to take immediate action.  In spite of
\n\tthe same, the said officers have been transferred on 19.04.2011,
\n\tjust one day prior to the date on which the reports were to be
\n\tsubmitted.   The pertinent aspect is that at para 3 of the order
\n\tdated 08.04.2011, it is clearly stated that the directions were to
\n\tbe complied with within one week.  However, it prima facie appears
\n\tthat until the visit of the members of the Central Forensic
\n\tLaboratory and team of AIIMS, the transfer orders were not passed.
\n\tPrima facie, the said action on the part of the State, in spite of
\n\tthe specific direction by this Court, can be said to be in breach
\n\tand non-compliance of the direction of this Court.  However, upon
\n\tthe inquiry further made by the Court, it has been reported by the
\n\tlearned Advocate General that Mr.Balwant Singh, Additional Chief
\n\tSecretary, Home Department, is the authority who had to comply with
\n\tthe direction.  Hence, before we prima facie conclude on the aspect
\n\tas to whether it is a case for initiation of action under the
\n\tContempt of Courts Act for breach and non-compliance to the order of
\n\tthis Court, an opportunity may be given to the said officer to
\n\tsubmit his reply and explanation, if any, and thereafter,
\n\tappropriate action may be initiated, if required.  Hence, we direct
\n\tMr.Balwant Singh, Additional Chief Secretary, Home Department to
\n\tsubmit a reply and explanation, if any, as to why proceedings under
\n\tthe Contempt of Courts Act should not be initiated for committing
\n\talleged breach and non-compliance of the directions issued by this
\n\tCourt for transferring certain police officers as requisitioned by
\n\tSIT, pursuant to the order passed by this Court.  Such explanation
\n\tshall be submitted on, or before, 11.05.2011.\n<\/p>\n
10.It has been submitted on behalf of
\n\tthe SIT that NIA has been requested to supply certain details which,
\n\tin spite of reminders, have not been supplied to the SIT.\n<\/p>\n
11.Hence, we direct that NIA shall
\n\tsupply the requisite details as desired by SIT within two weeks.
\n\tMr.Champaneri, learned Assistant Solicitor General has agreed to
\n\tcommunicate the order to the NIA.  Mr.Champaneri has submitted that
\n\twhatever information is available will be supplied if there is no
\n\tlegal impediment, and if there is any legal impediment, the same
\n\tshall be reported to this Court, on the next date.\n<\/p>\n
12.Mr.Saiyed appearing on behalf of
\n\tShamima Kausar wanted to tender an affidavit claiming to contain
\n\tcertain factual narrations of events that transpired at the office
\n\tof SIT, when the complaint was tendered by Shamima Kausar.\n<\/p>\n
13.We find that the said aspect need
\n\tnot be looked into at this stage.  If she is so desirous, the same
\n\tmay be submitted to the SIT who shall look into the matter, in
\n\taccordance with law.\n<\/p>\n
14.S.O. to 12.05.2011 at 2.30
\n\tp.m.  Mr.Champaneri shall submit the names of the suggested
\n\tofficers on that day.\n<\/p>\n
15.Before parting with this order, we
\n\tmay observe that the work which has been undertaken by Mr.Karnail
\n\tSingh as Chairman of SIT, as transpires from his individual report,
\n\tis found to be satisfactory by us and we record a sense of
\n\tappreciation.\n<\/p>\n
16.The
\n\treports submitted by the members of SIT shall be kept in a sealed
\n\tcover, in the safe custody of the Registrar General.”\n<\/p>\n
Pursuant
\n\tto the earlier order, Mr.P.S. Champaneri, learned Assistant
\n\tSolicitor General on behalf of the Central Government has tendered
\n\tthe names of three officers; (1) Dr. Satyapal Singh, IPS (MH:80),
\n\t(2) Shri J.V. Ramudu, IPS (AP:81), and (3) Shri Rajesh Ranjan, IPS
\n\t(BH:84) and he declared before the Court that as per the
\n\tinstructions received by him from the Ministry of Home Affairs,
\n\tGovernment of India, any officer so nominated by this Court will
\n\tdevote full time for ensuring that the investigation is completed at
\n\tthe earliest.\n<\/p>\n
\tWe
\n\thave heard Mr.Kamal Trivedi, learned Advocate General with Mr.P.K.
\n\tJani, learned Government Pleader for the State as well as Mr.Mukul
\n\tSinha, learned Counsel for the original petitioner.\n<\/p>\n
\tMr.Sinha
\n\thas left the matter to the Court, whereas on behalf of the State of
\n\tGujarat, some reservation was shown for officer at Sr. No.3, Shri
\n\tRajesh Ranjan.  As the choice and options are available, we find
\n\tthat we need not go into the aspects of reservation expressed on
\n\tbehalf of the State.  Dr. Satyapal Singh, even amongst the officers
\n\tnominated is the Senior Most Officer and he is, in any case, senior
\n\tto the remaining both the members of SIT.  Hence, we find that Dr.
\n\tSatyapal Singh, IPS (MH:80) can be nominated as the Chairman of SIT.
\n\t Consequently, SIT now shall comprising of the members as under:-\n<\/p>\n
\t(a)\tDr.\n<\/p>\n
\tSatyapal Singh, IPS (MH:80) shall be the Chairman of SIT<\/p>\n
\t(b)\tMr.Mohan
\n\tJha, IPS – Member of SIT<\/p>\n
\t(c)\tMr.Satish
\n\tVerma, IPS – Member of SIT<\/p>\n
\tIn
\n\tview of the full-fledged constitution of SIT, the functioning of SIT
\n\tshall now be as per the order dated 28.1.2011, vide paragraph 5 and
\n\tthe detailed direction given therein, save and except that in place
\n\tof Mr.Karnal Singh, IPS as the Chairman, Dr. Satyapal Singh, IPS
\n\tshall be the Chairman.  Hence, ordered accordingly.  It is observed
\n\tthat in view of the aforesaid direction now bifurcation of the work
\n\tas specified vide order dated 21.4.2011 as per para 5 and 6 would no
\n\tmore survive.  The State shall issue necessary Notification for such
\n\tpurpose within one week.  SIT shall further investigate into the
\n\tmatter and submit the report on or before 23.6.011 in a sealed
\n\tcover. The report shall be submitted to the Registrar (Judicial),
\n\tHigh Court of Gujarat.\n<\/p>\n
\tAs
\n\tper the above referred order dated 21.4.2011, it appears that the
\n\taffidavit has been filed by Mr.Balwant Singh, IAS, Additional Chief
\n\tSecretary, Home Department.  We may observe that the affidavit is
\n\tnot with the details about the role played at every level by the
\n\tconcerned officer from the date on which the requisition was
\n\treceived from SIT until the sanction for transfer order was granted
\n\tby the State Government.  We may record that unless and until
\n\tdate-wise details with the role played by the officer concerned for
\n\tpursuing the matter or not pursuing the matter with the name of the
\n\tofficer concerned is given, it may be difficult for the Court to
\n\thold the responsibility, if such question arises in future under the
\n\tContempt of Courts Act.  Further in absence thereof it cannot be
\n\ttermed as sufficient explanation.  We would have directed the said
\n\tOfficer to file the affidavit, however, on his behalf Mr.Trivedi,
\n\tlearned Advocate General has stated that such affidavit shall be
\n\tfiled on or before 23.6.2011.  Hence, we direct that the said
\n\taffidavit with the aforesaid shall accordingly be filed before this
\n\tCourt on or before 23.6.2011.\n<\/p>\n
\tIt
\n\twas next contended by the learned Advocate General on behalf of the
\n\tState by tendering the affidavit of Shri Rahul Gupta, IAS working as
\n\tthe Deputy Secretary, Home Department, stating that the State has
\n\tformed the monitoring authority to be looked after for the
\n\tfunctioning of the Special Task Force in all encounter matters and
\n\tit was submitted that as now SIT could not function effectively, the
\n\tinvestigation be handed over to Special Task Force working under the
\n\tmonitoring authority by this Court for the alleged incident of
\n\tencounter in question.\n<\/p>\n
\tWe
\n\tare unable to appreciate such a stand on the part of the State, more
\n\tparticularly when the said aspect was already considered by us in
\n\tthe order dated 24.9.2010 in Criminal Misc. Application No.9832 of
\n\t2010, which has been disposed of and the SIT was constituted vide
\n\tthe said order.  We may record that similar arguments and
\n\tcontentions were raised when we considered the aspects of
\n\treconstitution of SIT vide order dated 24.9.2010 in Criminal Misc.
\n\tApplication No.9832 of 2010.  It was observed by the Court at para
\n\t17 to 20, which reads as under:-\n<\/p>\n
\t“17.\tAfter
\n\tthe aforesaid exercise was completed but before this Court proceeded
\n\tto pass the order for constitution of new SIT by including the names
\n\tof the officers which this Court may find proper, the learned
\n\tAdvocate General pressed into service, the affidavit dated 20th
\n\tSeptember, 2010, filed by Mr.Rahul Gupta, Deputy Secretary of the
\n\tHome Department, contending that the State Government has issued a
\n\tNotification dated 16.09.2010 for constitution of Monitoring
\n\tAuthority and Special Task Force for investigation of the police
\n\tencounter deaths and it was also submitted that the Chairman of the
\n\tMonitoring Authority may be a retired Honourable Judge of the
\n\tSupreme Court of India or a retired Honourable Judge of the High
\n\tCourt of Gujarat.\n<\/p>\n
\t18.\tIt
\n\tmay also be recorded that in Paragraph-8 of the affidavit, it has
\n\tbeen stated on behalf of the State Government as under:\n<\/p>\n
“8.\tI
\n\trespectfully say and submit that under the circumstances, while
\n\trespectfully reserving my liberty to press for the reliefs prayed
\n\tfor in the Special Criminal Application filed by the State of
\n\tGujarat and reiterating the prayer that in view of the changed
\n\tcircumstances, that is to say, SIT of riot cases having expressed
\n\tits inability, this Honourable Court may be pleased to permit the
\n\tSpecial Investigation Team, constituted by this Honourable Court
\n\tearlier, to complete the investigation under the monitoring
\n\tauthority, as contemplated vide notification dated 16\/9\/2010 or the
\n\tinvestigation in question may be ordered to be completed by the
\n\tSpecial Task Force contemplated vide same notification dated
\n\t16\/9\/2010 under the monitoring of the said Monitoring Authority. In
\n\tthe respectful submission of the State, the said course of action
\n\twould not only instill confidence and credibility in the
\n\tinvestigation, but would result into a complete justice to all the
\n\tparties rather than constituting an agency having officers of
\n\tdifferent police forces since such a course of action has an inbuilt
\n\trisk of inevitable confusion in the investigation for various
\n\treasons.”\n<\/p>\n
\t19.\tWhen
\n\tthe learned Advocate General Mr.Trivedi was called upon to clarify
\n\tthe stand of the State Government on the aspects of constitution of
\n\tnew SIT by this Court, it was declared by the learned Advocate
\n\tGeneral that the attempt on the part of the State Government is  by
\n\tway of a suggestion that the investigation may be assigned to the
\n\tSpecial Task Force who is to work under the Monitoring Authority
\n\tinstead of new SIT comprising of the other officers who, in the
\n\tsubmission of the learned Advocate General, could be officers from
\n\toutside Gujarat State. It was submitted that there is no attempt on
\n\tthe part of the State to nullify the effect of the judgment of this
\n\tCourt but the Notification for constitution  of Special Task Force
\n\tmay be considered as one of the options available to the Court
\n\tinstead of constituting a new SIT. He also submitted that prior to
\n\tthe Notification dated 16th September, 2010, for
\n\tconstitution of Special Task Force and Monitoring Authority, the
\n\tGovernment has already given the names of the officers reserving its
\n\trights and contentions in the SLP pending before the Apex Court.
\n\tTherefore, it was submitted that the said aspects may be considered
\n\tbefore passing further order.\n<\/p>\n
20.\tIt
\n\tis hardly required to be stated that a judgment or order of the High
\n\tCourt in exercise of the power under Article 226 of the Constitution
\n\tcannot be nullified by any executive action of the Government, be it
\n\ta policy matter or constitution of a Special Task Force or the
\n\tconstitution of the Monitoring Authority, or otherwise. Therefore,
\n\tonce this Court having recorded the findings for constitution of a
\n\tSIT having a particular character and composition, such decision on
\n\tthe part of the State can hardly be considered as a valid ground to
\n\trecall the observations made for constitution of SIT, thereby
\n\tinstilling confidence and credibility to the investigation. Under
\n\tthese circumstances, based on the Notification, such suggestion
\n\tcannot be accepted. Further, when this Court has already ruled for
\n\tinclusion of certain officers in the SIT, unwillingness on the part
\n\tof the State for induction of any officer of IPS cadre from outside
\n\tthe State can neither be countenanced nor endorsed. We may record
\n\tthat the Constitution provides the competence of any State or the
\n\tUnion or any constitutional authority, including the judiciary, for
\n\tprotection of the rights of citizens and controls the exercise of
\n\tpower by any executive. In a Federal structure which prevails in our
\n\tnation, once this Court has exercised the power under Article 226 of
\n\tthe Constitution, and has ruled for assigning the investigation to a
\n\tbroad-based SIT, such reservations expressed on behalf of the State
\n\tcannot be countenanced by this Court. The aforesaid is coupled with
\n\tthe circumstance that State has not filed any review application for
\n\trecalling of the order. Further, even if the State, for the reasons
\n\tbest known to it, is desirous of constituting the Special Task Force
\n\tor a Monitoring Authority, it may be made applicable to other cases,
\n\tnamely, encounter cases other than the one considered and examined
\n\tby this Court in exercise of the power under Article 226 of the
\n\tConstitution. Further, if such aspect is considered, it may also
\n\tindirectly dilute the observations made by this Court in the
\n\tjudgment and also by the Apex Court, permitting the High Court  to
\n\tconstitute a new SIT. Hence, we find that such ground should not
\n\toperate as a bar or by way of a second thought for non-constitution
\n\tof the SIT and the assignment of investigation to it.”\n<\/p>\n
The
\n\tpertinent aspect is that when this Court expressly ruled that by
\n\texecutive action the judgement or the order of the High Court in
\n\texercise of the power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
\n\tcannot be nullified, be it policy matter or be it constitution of
\n\tSpecial Task Force or constitution of monitoring authority or
\n\totherwise and when it was further observed that even if the State
\n\tfor the reasons best known to it, is desirous to constitute Special
\n\tTask Force or monitoring authority, it may be made applicable to
\n\tother cases namely; the encounter cases other than the one
\n\tconsidered and examined by this Court in exercise of the power under
\n\tArticle 226 of the Constitution of India, there was absolutely no
\n\tnecessity on the part of the State or its Officer to file such an
\n\taffidavit.  The another aspect is that the aforesaid order dated
\n\t24.9.2010, whereby the aforesaid contentions were negatived and SIT
\n\twas constituted, was carried before the Apex Court and no
\n\tinterference has been made.  Under these circumstances, the approach
\n\ton the part of the State to re-agitate the
\n\tquestion of transferring the investigation to the Special Task Force
\n\tcan hardly be canvassed and we deprecate the same.  In all fairness,
\n\tit was expected for the State to wait till induction of the Chairman
\n\tof SIT, who may be officer from the Central Government and the
\n\tsubmission could have been made thereafter,
\n\tbut it appears that the stand of the State as was earlier, which has
\n\tbeen negated, is to see that the investigation may be assigned to
\n\tthe Special Task Force.  We leave the matter at that stage, without
\n\tobserving further but the fact remains that as per the above
\n\treferred direction issued by us, full-fledged SIT has been
\n\tconstituted and, therefore, in any case, there is no reason to take
\n\ta different view as sought to be canvassed.\n<\/p>\n
We
\n\tmay only record that the SIT, which is constituted shall be given
\n\tall assistance by the State Officers and any impediment in the
\n\tfunction of the SIT in any manner, shall be reported to this Court.\n<\/p>\n
We
\n\tmay also record that Shri Girish Laxman Singhal and others have
\n\tpreferred SLP (Cr.) No.9489 of 2011 before the Apex Court, but vide
\n\torder dated 11.5.2011, the Apex Court has clarified that its earlier
\n\torder dated 3.5.2011 shall not preclude the High Court from hearing
\n\tthe matter and to pass appropriate orders.  However, it is clarified
\n\tthat the present order, in any case, shall be subject to the order
\n\tthat may be passed by the Apex
\n\tCourt in the aforesaid SLP.\n<\/p>\n
S.O.\n<\/p>\n
\tTo 24.6.2011.\n<\/p>\n
     (Jayant Patel, J.)<\/p>\n
 (Smt. Abhilasha Kumari, J.)<\/p>\n
 vinod<\/p>\n
\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n
\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Gujarat High Court Sit vs Samima on 12 May, 2011 Author: Jayant Patel,&Nbsp;Honble Kumari,&Nbsp; Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print CR.MA\/15981\/2010 14\/ 14 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION No. 15981 of 2010 In CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION No. 9832 of 2010 In SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION No. 1850 of 2009 ========================================================= […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[16,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-212587","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-gujarat-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nSit vs Samima on 12 May, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sit-vs-samima-on-12-may-2011\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Sit vs Samima on 12 May, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sit-vs-samima-on-12-may-2011\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2011-05-11T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-04-13T07:59:06+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"18 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sit-vs-samima-on-12-may-2011#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sit-vs-samima-on-12-may-2011\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Sit vs Samima on 12 May, 2011\",\"datePublished\":\"2011-05-11T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-04-13T07:59:06+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sit-vs-samima-on-12-may-2011\"},\"wordCount\":3430,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Gujarat High Court\",\"High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sit-vs-samima-on-12-may-2011#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sit-vs-samima-on-12-may-2011\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sit-vs-samima-on-12-may-2011\",\"name\":\"Sit vs Samima on 12 May, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2011-05-11T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-04-13T07:59:06+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sit-vs-samima-on-12-may-2011#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sit-vs-samima-on-12-may-2011\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sit-vs-samima-on-12-may-2011#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Sit vs Samima on 12 May, 2011\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Sit vs Samima on 12 May, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sit-vs-samima-on-12-may-2011","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Sit vs Samima on 12 May, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sit-vs-samima-on-12-may-2011","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2011-05-11T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-04-13T07:59:06+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"18 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sit-vs-samima-on-12-may-2011#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sit-vs-samima-on-12-may-2011"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Sit vs Samima on 12 May, 2011","datePublished":"2011-05-11T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-04-13T07:59:06+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sit-vs-samima-on-12-may-2011"},"wordCount":3430,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Gujarat High Court","High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sit-vs-samima-on-12-may-2011#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sit-vs-samima-on-12-may-2011","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sit-vs-samima-on-12-may-2011","name":"Sit vs Samima on 12 May, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2011-05-11T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-04-13T07:59:06+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sit-vs-samima-on-12-may-2011#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sit-vs-samima-on-12-may-2011"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sit-vs-samima-on-12-may-2011#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Sit vs Samima on 12 May, 2011"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/212587","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=212587"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/212587\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=212587"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=212587"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=212587"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}