Stay updated with the latest - Click here to follow us on Instagram
Journalism of Courage
This is an archive article published on June 17, 2022
Ex-ASG’s counsel moves HC after police summons
Kadri had represented designated senior advocate Syed in the HC during his anticipatory bail hearing and quashing petition in an FIR concerning a business dispute in which the former ASG has been named as an accused of wrongful confinement, assault and extortion.
The Supreme Court also said that Bhatt and Pandya falsely claimed themselves to be eye-witnesses of the meeting in which utterances were allegedly made by the then Chief Minister and the Special Investigation Team has negated their claim.
Advocate Aniq Kadri, the legal counsel to former additional solicitor general (ASG) to the Gujarat High Court IH Syed, Thursday moved the HC seeking quashing of a summons issued by the Pethapur police station against him for allegedly providing illegal assistance or “sheltering” Syed.
Kadri had represented designated senior advocate Syed in the HC during his anticipatory bail hearing and quashing petition in an FIR concerning a business dispute in which the former ASG has been named as an accused of wrongful confinement, assault and extortion. Kadri has also sought a stay on its operation pending a final decision.
The advocate on record for Syed’s litigations, is also a junior at Syed’s office, and was served the summons on June 15 at 10 pm under the Criminal Procedure Code Section 41A, which provisions for notice of appearance “against whom a reasonable complaint has been made, or credible information has been received, or a reasonable suspicion exists that he has committed a cognizable offence”.
Seeking urgent circulation of the matter, the petition was taken up by the court of Justice Samir Dave. The court issued a notice to the respondent state and has kept the same returnable for Friday when it is expected to take up the matter for further hearing.
Arguing on behalf of Kadri, senior advocate Mihir Joshi submitted before the court, “A lawyer who appears for a person accused of an offence is said to render illegal assistance? This would set a very very wrong precedent. It would chill applications being made at all. Young lawyers would be petrified of appearing for any accused. This is concerning as an institution. Is this what any lawyer will have to face in anticipatory bail (applications)? Every accused seeking anticipatory bail will be in a position where he (the accused’s lawyer) knows the whereabouts (of the accused). So applying for anticipatory bail is illegal assistance? This is a cause for concern.”
While the court did not stay the operation of the summons, Justice Dave suggested Joshi fax the concerned investigating officer requesting a later date of summoning.
🚨 Limited Time Offer | Express Premium with ad-lite for just Rs 2/ day 👉🏽 Click here to subscribe 🚨
Story continues below this ad
The Gujarat High Court Advocates’ Association (GHAA) Thursday evening passed a unanimous resolution after an extraordinary emergency meeting was called for by the association president senior advocate Asim Pandya “to show solidarity and support to” Aniq Kadri who has been summoned by the police for “discharging his professional duties by filing his Vakalatpatra in an anticipatory bail application of his senior (Syed) who was made accused in an apparently false, frivolous and vexatious FIR concerning very trivial offences”.
GHAA managing committee resolved unanimously that if Kadri is compelled to attend the police station or to make a statement upon conclusion of all legal proceedings, “more than three hundred advocates of GHCAA will go to the police station with Kadri and stand with him in protest against the police excesses and abuse of police power.”
It was also resolved that GHAA shall make a representation to the Advocate General “to see that advocates are not harassed by police in the garb of exercising police power.”
It was also resolved unanimously that GHAA “shall make a detailed representation to the Bar Council of India and State Bar Council in this regard to push forward the Advocates Protection Bill and get a law passed.”
Story continues below this ad
It also decided to file a public interest litigation/class action or legal action “seeking court’s intervention and laying down guidelines for the arrest of an advocate and with regard to summoning an advocate”.
| UPDATE: The complainant (of the FIR) had filed an affidavit before the Hon’ble Supreme Court which recorded in its Order dated 08.08.2023 that the complainant had named I H Syed and alleged complicity “based on a misconception and therefore, at this stage, having realized the same, has indicated that he does not wish to prosecute the complaint against the appellant.” The Order then says “we are of the opinion that in the present facts and circumstances, the FIR as against the appellant herein, would not be appropriate and all further action unnecessary.” The Order set aside the order dated 02.06.2022 of the High Court and the FIR dated 15.05.2022 as against the appellant (I H Syed) stands quashed. |
© The Indian Express Pvt Ltd
Advertisement
Loading Recommendations...
Advertisement
Live Blog