Gujarat High Court
Shileshbhai Narsinhbhai Barvadiya vs National Investigation Agency on 22 November, 2021
Author: J.B.Pardiwala
Bench: J.B.Pardiwala
R/CR.A/961/2021 ORDER DATED: 22/11/2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 961 of 2021
==========================================================
SHILESHBHAI NARSINHBHAI BARVADIYA
Versus
NATIONAL INVESTIGATION AGENCY
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR ABHISHEKKUMAR C MALVI(9941) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR DEVANG VYAS(2794) for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR(2) for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIRAL R. MEHTA
Date : 22/11/2021
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA)
1. We have heard Mr.Chetan Pandya, the learned counsel appearing for the appellant and Mr.Devang Vyas, the learned Additional Solicitor General of India for the NIA.
2. This Court passed a detailed order dated 6.8.2021. We quote Paras.27, 28 and 29 of the order dated 6.8.2021.
"27. After the receipt of the report forwarded by the Special Judge (NIA), Ahmedabad dated 28th July 2021 referred to above as regards the status of the Special Case No.1 of 2017, we once again called for some more information from the learned Special Judge (NIA). We have been informed by the learned Special Judge (NIA) that as on date, she is incharge of almost seven trials under the NIA. We are further informed that the Special Judge is in the Page 1 of 4 Downloaded on : Mon Nov 22 23:28:28 IST 2021 R/CR.A/961/2021 ORDER DATED: 22/11/2021 midst of the sensational Naroda Patia trial. This Naroda Patia trial has something to do with the riots of the year 2002 and is going on past couple of years. We have also been informed that besides being a Special Judge (NIA), she has to do other judicial work as a City Civil Judge and also the administrative work of the City Civil and Sessions Court.
28. In such circumstances referred to above, we are left with no other option, but to make a humble request to Honourable the Chief Justice to consider recommending the Central Government to appoint at least two Additional Judges to the Special Court as provided under Section 11(6) of the Act, 2008. We quote Section 11 of the Act, 2008, which falls in Chapter IV titled "Special Courts"
as under:
"11. Power of Central Government to constitute Special Courts. (6) The Central Government may, if required, appoint an additional Judge or additional Judges to the Special Court, on the recommendation of the Chief Justice of the High Court."
29. We make a humble request to Honourable the Chief Justice to consider our aforesaid request so that the trial can proceed expeditiously and the undertrial accused may not have to languish in jail for a long period."
3. It appears from the letter dated 17.11.2021 addressed by the Additional Registrar (Administration) to the Deputy Registrar, Criminal Appeal Department that on the Administrative side, the Honourable Chief Justice has thought fit not to make any recommendations to the Page 2 of 4 Downloaded on : Mon Nov 22 23:28:28 IST 2021 R/CR.A/961/2021 ORDER DATED: 22/11/2021 Central Government for designation of Additional Special Courts under the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008, having regard to the fact that there are only 12 cases under the said Act and 2 Special Courts have been designated as the Special Courts for the said purpose.
4. We have also gone through the Report forwarded by the Special Judge, NIA, Ahmedabad as regards the status of the NIA Case No.1 of 2017. It appears that in last 3 months, only one witness has been examined. Once again, the Special Judge, NIA, Ahmedabad has reiterated that she is busy with the "Naroda Gam Case."
5. According to Mr.Devang Vyas, the learned Additional Solicitor General of India, the prosecution intends to examine around 47 witnesses. The modest estimate of the time likely to be consumed in examining these 47 witnesses, according to Mr.Vyas, would be at least 6 months.
6. In view of the aforesaid, we would like to know from Mr.Devang Vyas, the learned Additional Solicitor General of India, as to whether any serious prejudice is likely to be caused to the prosecuting agency if the appellant herein is ordered to be released on bail. We are saying so because the principal accused is on bail, of-course it is true that the principal accused got the benefit of default bail. However, we should not Page 3 of 4 Downloaded on : Mon Nov 22 23:28:28 IST 2021 R/CR.A/961/2021 ORDER DATED: 22/11/2021 ignore or overlook the fact that the appellant herein is in jail past more than 5 years. In such circumstances, we request Mr.Devang Vyas, the learned Additional Solicitor General of India to take appropriate instructions as regards the fact that if the appellant herein is released on bail, whether the same is likely to cause any grave prejudice to the prosecution.
7. Let appropriate instructions be taken at the earliest in the aforesaid regard. Post this matter on 29.11.2021.
(J. B. PARDIWALA, J) (NIRAL R. MEHTA,J) V.J. SATWARA Page 4 of 4 Downloaded on : Mon Nov 22 23:28:28 IST 2021