The Bombay High Court recently dismissed a plea filed by bookie Anil Jaisinghani, accused in the case registered on a complaint of Amruta Fadnavis, wife of Maharashtra Deputy Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis, alleging his illegal arrest.
A Division Bench of Justices AS Gadkari & PD Naik pronounced the verdict today and observed that the petition was devoid of merit.
Therefore, the Malabar Hill police station registered a first information report (FIR) on February 20 against Jaisinghani and his daughter Aniksha Jaisinghani for threatening to make public certain audio & video clips that would purportedly show Fadnavis accepting favors from the latter.
They were booked for offenses under Section 120B (criminal conspiracy) and Section 385 (extortion) of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 8 (induce public servant using corrupt means) and 12 (abetment) of the Prevention of Corruption Act.
Jaisinghani moved to the High Court for quashing of the FIR, while alleging that he had been illegally arrested and remanded to the police custody.
Senior Advocate Mrigendra Singh argued that Jaisinghani had been arrested from Godhra, Gujarat on March 19 for blackmailing & attempting to extort ₹10 crores from Fadnavis. He argued that Singh was not produced before any magistrate between Godhra to Mumbai and instead produced before a sessions judge in Mumbai after 36 hours.
The lawyer contended that the “I was arrested in Gujarat by the police there. I have an FIR against me in Gujarat for the last two years, why would they not arrest me for the FIR there? Everything was being monitored by the husband of the complainant, who is the Home Minister in the Maharashtra government.”
Singh added that the Mumbai Police held a conference on March 20, announcing that they had taken Jaisinghani into custody.
Advocate General Dr. Birendra Saraf appearing for the State and Mumbai Police argued that all procedures were followed properly and there was no delay in Jaisinghani’s arrest. Saraf informed the Court that the police had merely taken “possession” of Jaisinghani on March 19 and they wanted to produce him before the competent court in Mumbai.
He contended that the team took 11 hours to travel from Godhra to Mumbai. He added that as per the arrest memo, Jaisinghani was arrested on March 20 at 5 pm, and then produced before the special court for PC Act at 11 am on March 21.
Saraf contended that the travel time was supposed to be excluded. He added under provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, what was crucial to producing Jaisinghani before the magistrate who was competent to hear the remand.
After hearing the parties at length, the Court reserved the matter for orders.
It also clarified that as per precedents of the Supreme Court, it was bound to not consider petitions for quashing of FIR under the PC Act. When the Court stated this, Mrigendra Singh responded that he was willing to delete the prayer for quashing of FIR, and only contend illegal arrest of his client.
Jaisinghani continues to remain in the judicial custody of special court hearing cases under Prevention of Corruption Act after his bail plea was rejected on April 1. He has also been remanded to the custody of the Madhya Pradesh Police in an excise case.
