News Date :
Mumbai: The Bombay High Court on Friday 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 and PD Naik pronounced the verdict today and observed that the petition was devoid of merit.
The Malabar Hill police station had registered a first information report (FIR) on February 20 against Jaisinghani and his daughter Aniksha Jaisinghani for threatening to make public certain audio and video clips that would purportedly show Fadnavis accepting favours from the latter.
They were booked for offences 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 Prevention of Corruption Act.
Jaisinghani moved the High Court for quashing of the FIR, while also alleging that he had been illegally arrested and remanded to police custody.
Senior Advocate Mrigendra Singh argued that Jaisinghani had been arrested from Godhra, Gujarat on March 19 for blackmailing and attempting to extort ₹10 crore 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.
“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 Home Minister in the Maharashtra government,” the lawyer contended.
Singh added that the Mumbai Police had 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 was to produce 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 said this, 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 judicial custody of the 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.
