Você está na página 1de 15

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

CRL MP NO. ______ OF 2013

IN

WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) NO. 93 of 2011

IN THE MATTER OF:

PRADEEP N. SHARMA Petitioner/Applicant

VERSUS

STATE OF GUJARAT & OTHERS Respondents

APPLICATION FOR DIRECTIONS

TO

THE HONBLE CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA


AND HIS COMPANION JUSTICES OF
THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

THE HUMBLE APPLICATION OF


THE PETITIONER ABOVE NAMED.

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:

1. That the Petitioner/Applicant has filed the

accompanying writ petition seeking the transfer of the four

FIRs lodged against him, from the Gujarat State Police


Crime Branch to an independent investigative agency, i.e.

the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). This Honble

Court has been pleased to issue notice and the instant

case is now ripe for disposal.

2. It has been the consistent submission of the Applicant

herein since the last several years, that he has been

victimized and implicated in the said FIRs due to the

personal animosity, malice and mala fide of the State

Government at the behest of the Honble Chief Minister of

the State of Gujarat Shri Narendra Modi- Respondent

No. 3 herein. The reasons for this victimization are

twofoldfirstly since the Applicant herein is the younger

brother of Shri Kuldip Sharma IPS (Retd.) who incurred

the wrath of the Respondent no.3 herein due to his refusal

to follow the illegal diktats of Shri Narendra Modi and Shri

Amit Shah (the then Home Minister of the State of

Gujarat) during the tenure of Shri Kuldip Sharma as the

Additional Director General of Police (ADGP) CID-Crime,

State of Gujarat, as clearly enumerated in Paras 8 to 14

of the accompanying writ petition, contents of which are

not reproduced herein to avoid prolixity.

3. Secondly-the Applicants knowledge of the intimacy

shared by Shri Narendra Modi with a young lady architect,


aged 27 years, from Bangalore, but originally from Bhuj in

Gujarat, who was introduced to Shri Modi by the Applicant

himself in the year 2004.

4. That the Applicant herein joined the State

Administrative Services in the year 1981 and was

promoted to the IAS cadre in the year 1994. The Applicant

has enjoyed impeccable service record and has not faced

even a Departmental proceeding against him let alone

registration of an FIR till the Respondent No. 3 assumed

charge as the Chief Minister of the State of Gujarat, and

an upright officer, who never faced even a departmental

proceeding in his entire career from 1981 to 2010, was

suddenly implicated in 6 (six) FIRs from 2010 to 2012.

5. That the Applicant herein was the District Magistrate of

Kutch (with Bhuj City as the District HQ) during the period

of 2003-2006. During this tenure, he commissioned a

series of projects towards the beautification of Bhuj City

which was devastated by an earthquake in the year 2001.

One of the beautification projects was development of a

Hill Garden in the year 2005 for which the said female

architect was hired as the landscape architect. The said

female architect was introduced to Shri Narendra Modi by


the Applicant during the inaugural function of the said Hill

Garden by Shri Modi in the year 2004.

6. The Applicant herein verily believes that the

Respondent no. 3 and the said female architect remained

in touch with each other for next several years. There was

also wide spread rumours regarding the Video Compact

Disc (VCD) featuring the said female architect and a man

in compromising position as stated in Paras 15-16 of the

accompanying writ petition. The Applicant herein has no

concern with this VCD. However, the Applicant herein

believes that the Respondent No. 3 harbored a totally

misconceived apprehension that the Applicant herein is

recipient of the information regarding this VCD, the

contents of which, if disclosed in public, would be

detrimental to the carefully constructed and publicized

image of the Respondent No. 3 and consequently,

damage the electoral prospects of the Respondent No. 3.

It for this reason, that a number of false and frivolous

cases against the Applicant herein were registered with a

view to implicate him and punish him.

7. That vide the instant application, the Applicant most

respectfully seeks the leave of this Honble Court, to bring

some recent developments to the kind attention of this

Honble Court. These developments/facts lend credence


to the submissions made by the Applicant in the instant

writ petition and are thus germane for the adjudication of

the instant matter.

8. That, earlier this month, two websites namely-

Cobrapost and Gulail have released tapes of the

telephonic conversation between Shri Amit Shah, the then

Minister of State, Home, Government of Gujarat at that

time and Shri G.L Singhal IPS, who was serving as the

Superintendent of Police, Anti Terrorist Squad (ATS),

Gujarat State, Ahmedabad. The said conversations are

during the period from August-September 2009 when Shri

GL Singhal, IPS was reporting to Shri Amit Shah. The

transcripts of the taped conversations reveal that the said

lady architect and the Applicant herein were placed under

an all-pervasive and intrusive surveillance at the behest of

a person referred to as Saheb by Shri Amit Shah. The

political party, to which the Respondent No. 3 belongs,

has openly stated in numerous press conferences in the

last few days that the surveillance was done at the behest

of the Respondent no. 3, Shri Narendra Modi. Therefore,

there is no iota of doubt that the person referred to as

Saheb by Shri Amit Shah in the tapes/transcripts refer to

the Respondent No. 3 herein- Shri Narendra Modi. It is

pertinent to note that Shri Amit Shah was merely the


Minister of State, for the Home Department. The Cabinet

post of the Home Department by Shri Narendra Modi,

himself and therefore was directly in control of the Police

Department.

9. It is most respectful submission of the Applicant herein

that the taped conversations reveal severe and material

violations of the Indian Telegraph Act 1885, and an

absolute disregard to the guidelines laid down by this

Honble Court, in its judgment dated 18.12.1996 in the

case of PUCL vs. Union of India & Ors reported in (1997)

1 SCC 301.

10. It is further submitted that under Section 5(2), Indian

Telegraph Act, 1885, phone tapping is allowed only in the

public emergency or in the interest of public safety.

However, at times when an investigative agency/authority

needs to record phone conversations of the person who is

under suspicion, the said authority is required seek

permission from the Home Ministry before going ahead

with such an act, explaining thereto the specific reasons

for which such surveillance is required to be conducted.

Despite the guidelines under the Telegraph Act and the

rules framed thereunder being in place which prescribes

the procedure and the manner in which surveillance can


be conducted on an individual without violation of his

Right to Privacy, the surveillance as bought on record by

the annexed transcripts/tapes on the Applicant herein and

the said female architect were in utter disregard and

violation of the same. True copies of Government of

Gujarats Resolution dated 27th March 1997 and Ministry

of Communications Notification dated 16.02.1999 laying

down the rules in this regard are annexed herewith as

ANNEXURE- .These transcripts reveal a strong bias

and prejudice of the State of Gujarat against the Applicant

herein and the States intent to somehow implicate the

Applicant herein in criminal offences. The Applicant herein

did not have a copy of these transcripts and was unaware

of the same at the time of filing of the instant Writ Petition.

However, these transcripts now present an ex post facto

confirmation of the apprehension of the Applicant herein

and as averred in the instant petition, that one of the

reasons for victimizing him was the Applicants knowledge

of the relationship of the Respondent No. 3 with the said

female architect.

11. As indicated on the above-mentioned websites, there

are approximately 267 (two hundred and sixty seven)

taped conversations which were also produced by Shri GL

Singhal on 09.06.2013 before the CBI during the


investigation of RC- BS/1/S/2011/0005/CBI SCB Mumbai-

which case is commonly referred to as the Ishrat Jahan

Fake Encounter Case. The copy of the seizure

panchnama (which is part of the chargesheet filed in the

case by the CBI before the competent court in

Ahmedabad), digital audio files of all the 267 taped

conversations, and copy of Shri GL Singhals statement

under section 161 CrPC before the CBI are all obtained

from the above said two websites. As these documents

are on the record of the CBI, there is no doubt harbored

by the Applicant with regards to their authenticity. The

True copy of the seizure panchnama dated 09.06.2013 is

annexed hereto as Annexure A. The true copy of the

statement of Shri GL Singhal dated 11.04.2013 under

Section 161, CrPC before the CBI in the Ishrat Jahans

Case is annexed hereto as Annexure B. The true

translated copy (from Gujarati to English) of the

transcripts of the 267 audio files is annexed hereto as

Annexure C.

12. It is most respectfully submitted, that pursuant to the

release of the annexed transcripts/tapes, as learnt from

various newspaper reports, the explanation given for such

extensive surveillance is that it was made on the oral

request of the father of the said female architect.


However, this explanation seems absolutely incredulous

and unworthy of any belief, in light of the contents of the

conversations that Shri Amit Shah had with Shri GL

Singhal, IPS which clearly reveal that the surveillance was

extremely intrusive and hostile and not as innocuous and

benign as sought to be made. That the explanation of the

so called request from the father of the female architect is

a mere after thought and the purported no objection by

the father of the said female architect does not absolve

Shri Narendra Modi, Shri Amit and others guilty persons

from committing violations of the applicable laws.

13. It is pertinent to note that at the time when the

surveillance was being conducted, the said female

architect, was a mature lady of 32 years and not someone

of tender age. The said architect was an independent

professional and therefore, it is highly inconceivable to

state that her father approached the Respondent No. 3

herein, for such uncalled for and intrusive surveillance.

The State of Gujarat and the Respondent No.3 be put to

strict proof to provide credible and cogent evidence that

such a request was indeed made by the father of the girl

and that such surveillance was in due compliance of the

applicable laws.
14. That the Applicant herein seeks to draw the kind

attention of this Hon'ble Court to the references made by

Shri Amit Shah to Applicant herein during the course of

his conversation with Shri G.S. Singhal. The Parts of the

said transcripts which directly bears mention of the

Petitioner herein are excerpted herein below:

Amit Shah: That man had gone from


Bhavnagar to Mumbai and is
back in Ahmedabad. In
connection with the matter we are
watching him also. So today
deploy 8 to 10 men, he stays at
Kuldips (Brothers) House.
There he has called the
Bhavnagar Corporation
vehicle, this and the
*******[name of the girl] matter
keep a watch the whole night,
call for your man as he will
stay here for a day or two and
try to be active. I have their
conversation and know the
nature of their relationship. Get
more men or some of your
confidants.
G.S. Singhal: Sir I have called two three men
from the crime department
Amit Shah: 2-3 to watch the other side call
for men from the IB and some IB
men to intercept calls in the night
should be posted inside.

Amit Shah: Amit this side, could you talk?


G.S. Singhal: Sir I did and according to him
surveillance cannot be done at
shahibaug by his men.
Amit Shah: No no it can be done from a
distance, what is happening,
where his car is parked!
G.S. Singhal: Sir I will ask him (AKS) to talk to
you
Amit Shah: or you put one of your own man
to watch.
G.S. Singhal: I just checked his mobile location
and it shows in Bhavnagar.
Amit Shah: He must have left the instrument
there, he was in Mumbai. You
check it out, he must have left the
phone at home. He has an
additional number, I will ask AK
Sharma to give it to you.
G.S. Singhal: I have taken it from him three
now and two are showing
location in Bhavnagar. Have to
check the third one.
Amit Shah: Check the third also. And where
is the lady?
G.S. Singhal: She is sitting at Navrangpura
near havmor.
Amit Shah: With her fianc?
G.S. Singhal: Yes sir
Amit Shah: I want him (Pradeep Sharma) in
jail for as many days as
Vanjara has been jailed for. You
be courageous and strong. No
matter how big the person, put
him in jail.
G.S. Singhal: right sir

[Emphasis supplied]

15. It is most respectfully clarified that the contents of the

above conversations would reveal the hostile attitude and

malicious attitude of the State Government the Applicant

herein whos every movement was being followed without

any cogent reasons or any illegal act committed thereto.

In one of the conversations, Shri Amit Shah makes

reference to one Shri Vanzara, who is none other than

Shri D.G. Vanzara, IPS, currently in jail for his role in

Sohrabuddin Sheikh fake encounter case. It is pertinent to

bring to the notice of this Honble Court that Shri D.G.


Vanzara was arrested along with certain other police

officers and Shri Amit Shah as a result of inquiries

pursued vigorously by the brother of the Applicant herein-

Shri Kuldip Sharma, when he was in-charge of the State

CID Crime. This encounter was stage managed by certain

Police Officers of the State of Gujarat at the behest of the

Respondent no. 3 and Shri Amit Shah, in order to further

the public image and electoral prospects of the

Respondent No. 3. Shri D.G. Vanzara, who was also

subsequently arrested by the CBI for the fake encounter

of Tulsi Prajapati, Ishrat Jahan and Sadiq Jamal, was

considered at that point of time as someone who was very

close to the Respondent No. 3 and Shri Amit shah and

therefore, they wanted to ensure that the Applicant herein

spends as much time behind the bars as has been done

by Shri D.G. Vanzara, their close aide.

16. It is most respectfully submitted that, when these

interceptions were being carried out there was only one

case namely- M Case, CR No. 1 of 2008, based on a

private complaint. This Complaint was general in nature,

filed in the Court of JMFC, Bhuj by a person not remotely

affected or connected with the subject matter of the

complaint. The court had passed an order entrusting

investigation to State CID Crime under section 156(3)


CrPC. However, the CID Crime had filed a revision

application in the Sessions Court against the said order

on the ground that the judicial court did not possess the

powers under the law to direct investigation by State CID

Crime, and therefore was not investigating it. Arbitrarily

thereafter, the CID Crime had withdrawn in June 2009 the

revision application for enabling it to investigate the case.

It is therefore submitted, that this arbitrary reversal in the

State attitude arose out of the personal reasons of the

Respondent No. 3 herein-the Chief Minister with regards

to the matter of the said female architect. It is also

notable that the M Case no. 1 of 2008 appears nowhere

in the conversations between Shri Amit Shah and Shri GL

Singhal as being the reason for the surveillance, if at all.

Furthermore, it is important to note that the State IB, the

Crime Branch of Ahmedabad City Police, and the ATS

were all involved in this illegal exercise of telephone

interceptions and surveillance who had no role to play in

the investigation of M Case No. 1/2008.

17. That from the aforesaid facts and circumstances and

the sequence of events it becomes clear that all the

actions taken against the Applicant herein were biased

and prejudicial. The whole machinery including the higher

bureaucracy and the Police Administration of the State


Govt. has been misused to create false cases against the

Applicant. The Charge sheets filed in various cases are

outcome of bias and prejudicial investigations. The

Applicant herein has strong reasons to believe that the

lodging of FIRs and thereafter the Investigations

conducted by the State Police are with a view to harass

the Applicant herein and is an act of vendetta. It is the

case of the Applicant that the Revenue Proceedings are

being converted into vexatious criminal cases. Therefore

it would be in the interest of justice if all the FIRs are

being investigated by an Independent Agency like CBI

beyond the control of the Respondent No. 3 herein.

Unless the relief as prayed for in the instant petition is not

granted, there would be a denial of the right of free and

fair trial by the State of Gujarat which is the Applicants

constitutionally guaranteed right.

18. That the instant application on behalf of the Petitioner

is bona fide and an order allowing the present application

shall meet the ends of the justice. The balance of

convenience is in favour of the Petitioner and if the

prayers as sought for in this application and the

accompanying petition are not granted then the Petitioner

shall suffer grave and sever prejudice. The Applicant has

not preferred any application in this regard.


PRAYER:

IN THE PREMISES STATED HEREINABOVE, IT IS

THEREFORE, MOST RESPECTFULLY PRAYED, THAT

THIS HONBLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO:

a) Allow the instant application;


b) Take on record the documents and transcripts

annexed with the instant application and direct the

Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to register a

case and conduct a thorough inquiry/investigation

into the violation of the Telegraph Act 1885 and

other applicable laws by Shri Narendra Modi, Shri

Amit Shah and any other such persons;


c) Allow the accompanying instant writ petition and ;
d) Pass any other and further order as may deem fit

and proper to this Honble Court.

AND FOR THIS ACT OF KINDNESS THE PETITIONER

AS IN DUTY BOUND SHALL EVEN PRAY

Drawn and Filed by:

SUNIL FERNANDES
Advocate for Petitioner
Drawn on:

Filed on:

Você também pode gostar