Surat Businessman Beating Case: Supreme Court Grants Bail, Yet Remains in Custody, Demands ₹1.6 Crore; PI Rawal Suspended Post SC Verdict
Despite being granted anticipatory bail by the Supreme Court, a Surat businessman was unlawfully detained by the police, subjected to torture, and coerced into paying 1.6 crores. Following a complaint filed by the accused’s lawyer in the Supreme Court, the court expressed displeasure with senior officials, including Surat’s Police Commissioner, and warned of legal consequences. In response to the Supreme Court’s ruling, Police Commissioner Ajay Tomar initiated a departmental inquiry into the incident and subsequently suspended Vesu Police Inspector RY Rawal.
Controversy Sparks as Supreme Court-Anticipatory Bail Holder Rearrested: Vesu PI Suspended
In a significant turn of events, Vesu Police Inspector (PI) R.Y. Rawal faced suspension after the arrest and detention of a builder, previously granted anticipatory bail by the Supreme Court. The matter escalated to the point where contempt notices from the Supreme Court were issued against various state officials, including the Additional Secretary, Surat Police Commissioner, Chief Judicial Magistrate, and GCP Vijay Singh Gurjar. As a response, Police Commissioner Ajay Kumar Tomar took action by suspending PI R.Y. Rawal and assigning the responsibility to D.U. Barad from the Special Branch.
The Supreme Court expressed its displeasure over the alleged violation of its order by Surat police in the case of businessman Tushar Shah. Despite being granted anticipatory bail on December 8, the police sought his remand, which was approved by the Chief Judicial Magistrate from December 13 to December 19. Tushar Shah’s lawyers, Iqbal Syed and Mohammad Aslam, accused the police of using this opportunity to torture and extort over 1 crore rupees illegally. The Supreme Court issued contempt notices to state Additional Secretary Kamal Dayani, Surat Police Commissioner Ajay Tomar, DCP Vijaysinh Gurjar, PIRY Rawal, and the Chief Judicial Magistrate for alleged non-compliance with its order.
Supreme Court Criticizes Police Action: PI Suspended
Despite being granted anticipatory bail, businessman Tushar Shah faced arrest and remand by Surat’s Vesu Police Station, leading to a stern rebuke from the Supreme Court. The court ordered the submission of CCTV footage, but the police claimed non-functional cameras. Expressing dissatisfaction, the Supreme Court triggered a departmental inquiry by the Police Commissioner, resulting in the suspension of the Police Inspector.
Supreme Court Controversy: Businessman Allegedly Detained Despite Bail
In a case involving businessman Tushar Rajnikantbhai Shah from Surat, the Supreme Court granted conditional bail on December 8, 2023. Shockingly, it is claimed that the Surat police detained Shah just four days after the court’s decision. The businessman was allegedly subjected to torture during his four-day custody, with an illicit demand of Rs. 1.6 crore. This has led to a contempt of court petition filed in the Supreme Court, raising serious questions about law enforcement actions.
Supreme Court Grills Gujarat Officials Over Contempt Petition
Following a contempt petition filed against the Supreme Court order, the apex court directed pointed questions at Gujarat government officials and IPS officers in Surat. Notices were issued to Ajay Tomar, Police Commissioner, Deputy Commissioner of Police Vijay Singh Gurjar, and Inspector R.Y. Rawal. The court expressed its dismay at the investigating officer’s audacity to seek remand in a lower court despite Supreme Court bail. The court questioned the intentional nature of the act, emphasizing that such actions cannot go unpunished, and stern action must be taken against the implicated police officers.
Surat Police Faces Heat as Supreme Court Questions CCTV Failure in Custody
The Supreme Court, dissatisfied with the Surat police’s inability to provide CCTV footage of Tushar Shah’s custody, issued contempt notices to police officers and the magistrate. Despite an unconditional pardon offer, the bench dismissed it, asserting that the absence of CCTV records for four critical days was intentional. Expressing stern disapproval, the court demanded answers from the Surat police, emphasizing that in a major business center like Surat, the CCTV malfunction is unacceptable. The court took a firm stance, insisting that police officers must appear, possibly leading to imprisonment.
