Supreme Court stays trial against officer accused of secretly filming ex-Anand collector

The Supreme Court’s interim order dated June 30 stated, “Issue notice, returnable on 24.08.2026. In the meantime, there shall be an order of stay on further proceedings qua the petitioner arising out of (the criminal case).”

The SC also condoned the delay in filing the petition and allowed Vyas’s applications seeking exemption from filing the certified copy of the impugned judgment and official translations, besides permitting additional documents to be placed on record.

Vyas was arrested, along with deputy mamlatdar Jayesh Patel and advocate Haresh Chavda, in August 2023 in a case that sent shockwaves through Gujarat’s bureaucracy.

According to investigators, the trio procured and installed hidden cameras in the Anand collector’s chamber to secretly record Gadhvi’s meetings with a woman visitor and later used the footage to compel him to clear disputed land files and other official matters.

The prosecution alleged that Patel carried a laptop containing the footage to Gadhvi’s office and threatened to release the videos and initiate criminal proceedings through the woman unless the files were cleared. The charge sheet further alleged that copies of the videos were stored on flash drives and later shared with media organisations.

Police had claimed to have recovered burnt hard disks from a canal, CCTV footage allegedly showing attempts to destroy evidence, WhatsApp chats and records linking specific land applications to the alleged demands.

The Gujarat government suspended Vyas following her arrest. Earlier this month, the Anti-Corruption Bureau also booked her under the Prevention of Corruption Act after allegedly finding disproportionate assets worth more than Rs 3.56 crore, or nearly 69 per cent above her known sources of income.

Before the Supreme Court, Vyas argued that she was a victim of a “frivolous criminal case” and described herself as a “senior lady official” who was harassed due to her refusal to the advancement offered by her superior.

Her petition contended that the prosecution was selective and motivated, alleging that the then collector and the woman involved had been turned into witnesses while action was pursued only against her. The plea described the investigation as a case of “picking and choosing” accused persons and a “colourable exercise of power”.

Vyas further relied on her annual performance records and argued that Gadhvi himself had previously commended her work and integrity before later becoming a key prosecution witness. The petition described the subsequent allegations as an “about-face” and a “pre-emptive strike to shield himself”.

The SLP sought to “quash and set aside the FIR, chargesheet, and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom” and requested the apex court to “stay all proceedings arising out of the impugned FIR and chargesheet, including proceedings pending before the learned trial court, insofar as they relate to the present petitioner” besides seeking an order of “no coercive steps” against her.

The Gujarat High Court had earlier refused to interfere in the matter, holding that there was a “strong prima facie case against the present petitioner” and that there was “sufficient material on record to prosecute her for the said offence”.

The trial before the Anand court will now remain in the case against Vyas until the Supreme Court decides the petition. The SC will hear the matter on August 24.