SNEHLATA GOUTI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this common order, four petitions being Special Criminal Application Nos. 1520/95, 1521/95, 1522/95 and 1523/95, on being transferred by the Supreme Court vide order dated 1.11.1995, are being disposed of. The petitions filed before the Supreme Court has been treated as petitions under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India before this Court. The petition has been filed by petitioner No. 1-Smt. Snehlata Gouti, petitioner No. 2-Ajitkumar Gouti, petitioner No. 3-Kishore Kumar Gouti, petitioner No. 4-Ranjit Mull Gouti. In the said petition the State of Maharashtra, Commissioner of Police, Mumbai, State of Gujarat, Commissioner of Police, Ahmedabad, Union Bank of India, Commissioner of Police, Delhi and Union of India have been made party-respondents No. 1 to 7 respectively. At one stage as prayed by the learned Advocate for the petitioners, respondents No. 1, 2, 3, 6 and 7 were deleted. However, by a subsequent prayer, the said order was recalled, and therefore, they have continued as respondents. Petitioners have made following prayers:

(2.) The petitioners appears to be a family dealing in the business of jewellery. As per their say they are under the threat of some officers of the Police and Customs Departments. It is alleged that at the instance of some anti-social people belonging to the underworld, they are being harrassed by the Department of Enforcement of Foreign Exchange. Petitioners have narrated the harrassment since 1984 or even prior to that. As per their say, the started business of bullion merchants and Commission Agents and Jewellers in they name and style of "Gouti Sons" at Bombay. The say of petitioner No. 4 is that the annual turnover of the business gradually increased to 30 crores in the year 1984. He says that before 1978 he had partnership business at Calcutta. In the year 1984, he was being harrassed by one officer of the Central Excise Department Mr S. N. Thappa. In the year 1989, the petitioner No. 4 incorported a Private Limited Company in the name of M/s Madan Gems (P) Ltd. at Bombay. It is said that in the year 1992, series of raids and searches were made on the new premises of the petitioner by Marine and Preventive Wing of the Central Excise department. The say of the petitioner No. 4 is that it was an undue harrassment and in fact no incriminating documents were recovered or found. However, he shifted to Ahmedabad and started a shop in the name "Joy Crafts" at 14, Doctor House, C.G. Road, Ahmedabad. It is alleged that certain telephone calls were received by the petitioner No. 4 i.e. Ranjit Mull Gouti. It is said that the callers were none else but the police officers. It is further alleged that sometime thereafter, 5 persons came to the house of the petitioners at Ahmedabad in a fiat car and started manhandling and abusing them. On raising alarm, his servants and neighbours came to his help and one of them was caught with the car and he was handed over to the police along with the car and a complaint was lodged by the petitioner No. 4. The grievance is that inspite of that no action has been taken by the police. It is also stated that he subsequently came to know that the said person was one Rangaraj Mehta, a member of the underworld gang. The said Rangaraj Mehta was subsequently arrested by the police in some other criminal case. The further say of the petitioners is that within one week of the incident, 9 persons again, visited their house at Ahmedabad. It was stated by them that they were sent by the police station Astodia, Ahmedabad. They took away certain gold and silver articles from the petitioners' house. A written complaint of the incident was lodged. As the petitioner was receiving the telephone calls, he made certain arrangements with the telephone department on account of which he could control the threatening telephone calls at his residence. He further says that the said Rangaraj Mehta alodged a complaint against the petitioner No. 4 in the Metropolitan Magistrate Court No. 16 at Ahmedabad alleging that the said Rangaraj Merita had given one golden necklace to the petitioner for valuation, but the petitioner had not returned the same. The petitioner was granted anticipatory bail in the said case by the High Court. In para 12 some more allegations have been made. In para 13 it is stated that the petitioner No. 4 had exported certain gold articles with diamond and Emerald stones to M/s. Nisha Jewellers, Bermingham, U.K. and also to M/s. Chemmannur Jewellers, Dubai. They were valued at Rs. 7 lakhs. It is stated that the Union Bank of India in that regard has written a confidential letter to the Enforcement Department of Foreign Exchange, Government of India making a some false allegation against the petitioners.

(3.) In para 14, the petitioners have stated that on 16.10.1995 at about 11.00 a.m. two persons came to their Princess Street Office and they wanted to meet the petitioner No. 4. The office peon said, that the petitioner No. 4 was available at Chira Bazar shop of petitioner. They reached the Chira Shop along with others. They threatened the employees and telephoned to find out whether the petitioner was available at home. That telephone was attended by petitioner No. 1, wife of the petitioner No. 4. The caller disclosed that he was S.I. Chudavat from Astodia police station, Ahmedabad. When the petitioner No. 1 answered that petitioner No. 4 was not at home, the caller i.e. S.I. Chudavat threatened the petitioner that they have played enough and she was abused in filthy language. In that connection, petitioner No. 1 lodged complaint with Gamdevi police station, Bombay on 19.10.1995. In para 15 it is alleged that on 16.10.1995 at about 11.30 a.m. 7-8 persons along with two police officers came to raid the residence of the petitioners. One of the police officers was identified as Mr. Chauhan by some of the neighbours. When they found none of the petitioners was present, they beat up Mr. George, who was one of the servants of the petitioners. Petitioner No. 3 hid himself and he noticed that the Gundas have broken household things and ransacked and took away many valuables worth more than Rs, 5 lakhs and accounts books and registers and left the house after damaging the car. At that time the petitioner No. 4 was at Madurai. It is further stated that the petitioner No. 4, thereafter approached Mr. Bhaskar Mehta, Advocate at Bombay. He advised the petitioners to be careful and take appropriate security measures. He also says that he tried to contact the Commissioner of Police, Bombay. Petitioners, thereafter, straigtway filed petitions under Art. 32 of the Constitution before the Supreme Court, on 30.12.1995.