‘Society learns from them’: Gujarat strongly opposes AAP MLA Chaitar Vasava’s plea against conviction

Vasava, the Dediapada MLA, was convicted by an Additional Sessions Court at Rajpipla on June 23 along with eight co-accused, including his wife Shakuntala Vasava, and sentenced to seven years’ rigorous imprisonment. The case arose from the October 30, 2023 confrontation involving forest officials after an encroachment removal drive in Bogaj village.

Amin submitted before Justice Vimal Vyas of the Gujarat High Court that the prosecution case began with forest officials being asked for several months to remove encroachments from forest land. After a Forest Offence Register was recorded on October 29, officials went to the site the following morning and removed crops from the encroached area.

The State’s case is that the officials were subsequently summoned to Vasava’s residence, where they were allegedly made to stand in a line and threatened to give compensation for the removed crop. The prosecution alleged that the confrontation escalated into abuse and threats to the officials’ lives, followed by the alleged bringing of a firearm and firing of a round in the air.

Amin placed particular emphasis on the alleged firearm incident. According to his submission, Vasava instructed a person present at the spot to bring a firearm. “The firearm was brought,” he said, before submitting that “a shot was fired in the air” to further frighten the forest officials and endanger their lives.

The prosecution also relies on the alleged payment of Rs 60,000 following the confrontation. According to the State, the forest officials reported the incident to their superior, who arranged the amount by withdrawing it from his bank account, after which the money was allegedly paid to the accused. Amin referred to the prosecution’s reliance on a disclosure statement under Section 27 of the Evidence Act.

He argued that the alleged extortion could not be viewed in isolation from the position held by Vasava.

Amin submitted, “And basically, the person who occupies the position on which he is posted, one would like to learn from him. He is the guide, who would guide the society… the population in our State, which is more than six crores, (has) only 182 members of the Legislature. So, these 182 persons, they would be a beacon of light. Society has to learn from them — what they speak, how they walk, how they behave, how they treat others… in the light of it, if a person like an MLA does this type of act, they stand on a different footing.”

The State also submitted that Vasava’s actions could “cannot be equated with” the co-accused like Ramesh or Dungaji — both local farmers. Amin then turned to the statutory ingredients of extortion, reading out Section 383 of the IPC before the court.

“Whoever intentionally puts any person in fear of any injury, injury is defined in Section 44, to that person or to any other person, and thereby dishonestly induces the person so put in fear to deliver to any person any property or valuable security, or anything signed or sealed which may be converted into a valuable security, commits extortion… So, the principal ingredient is to put a person in fear, legitimately or otherwise,” Amin submitted.

He then referred to Section 386, concerning extortion by putting a person in fear of death or grievous hurt, adding that Vasava did it “more than once.”

Amin also opposed suspension of sentence on the ground that the prosecution witnesses inspired confidence. He argued that the absence of a particular piece of physical evidence could not by itself dislodge the prosecution case where the testimony of witnesses was credible.

“What is necessary is the sterling quality and credibility of the witnesses who inspire confidence. And that confidence is inspired,” he submitted.

The State argued that an applicant seeking suspension of sentence was required to place relevant antecedents before the court. Amin alleged that the details had not been disclosed in Vasava’s application and argued that such non-disclosure and suppression weighed against suspension of sentence.

No evidence for threat, use of firearm: MLA

Vasava has challenged both his conviction and sentence in the High Court and sought suspension of the seven-year punishment and bail during pendency of his appeal.

In his petition, Vasava has disputed the prosecution’s account of the threats and firearm incident, contending that the allegations were unsupported by forensic or scientific evidence. He has pointed to the alleged non-recovery of the firearm, cartridge or bullet and the absence of ballistic, gunshot residue or other forensic reports. He has also highlighted inconsistencies in witness accounts over whether the weapon was a pistol or a revolver.

On the alleged Rs 60,000 payment, Vasava has contended that the transaction took place a day later at a different location and he was not present when the money was allegedly paid and that the amount was arranged after the complainant consulted senior officers. He cited contradictions in witness depositions, delay in registration of the FIR, failure to conduct identification proceedings and alleged reliance on stock panch witnesses.

Vasava has also challenged the trial court’s treatment of his silence during custodial interrogation, his refusal to undergo a polygraph test and his statement under Section 313 of the CrPC. His petition contends that the trial court improperly shifted the burden of proof onto the accused and relied on incoherent and inapplicable evidence while overlooking material gaps in the prosecution case.

The appeal also challenges the application of the penal provisions and alleges procedural and legal errors in the trial court judgment, including what Vasava describes as “double punishment”. He maintains that the prosecution failed to establish his guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

Vasava’s counsels Arjun Joshi, Isa Hakim and Senior Advocate I H Syed, who also made submissions on Wednesday, were present in the court on Friday. The High Court will further hear the matter on Monday. While Vasava and his Personal Assistant Jitendra are still in jail, six other co-accused have been granted bail by the High Court in July, including Vasava’s wife Shakuntala.