Jaipur, June 18: The Rajasthan High Court has dismissed a petition challenging the arrest of former minister Mahesh Joshi. The petition was filed by his son, Rohit Joshi, who claimed that his father’s arrest in connection with a multi-crore scam related to the Jal Jeevan Mission was illegal.
In its ruling, the Rajasthan High Court raised serious questions about the procedures followed by the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) and the special judge involved in the case, highlighting several procedural flaws.
The bench, comprising Chief Justice Umashankar Vyas and Justice Ashok Kumar Jain, stated in its detailed order that it is a constitutional requirement to provide a written basis for an arrest. However, this was not properly adhered to in this case.
The court found that the ACB failed to present any documented evidence to substantiate that Mahesh Joshi was informed of the actual grounds for his arrest in writing. Instead, only legal provisions were cited, while the grounds for arrest and the reasons for arrest are distinct legal concepts.
The High Court also noted contradictions in the ACB’s responses. Initially, the agency claimed that the grounds for arrest were provided, but later stated that this information was communicated to the family. The court remarked that the additional facts presented appeared to be “fabricated” at first glance.
Furthermore, the High Court expressed concerns regarding the proceedings of the special judge. The court pointed out that objections to the validity of the arrest were raised during the remand proceedings on May 7, yet the application was kept pending for nearly 31 days instead of being promptly addressed, which it deemed a serious lapse.
However, the High Court clarified that since Mahesh Joshi is in judicial custody, the validity of his arrest could not be examined through the petition for habeas corpus. This was the basis for dismissing the petition.
The court emphasized the need for police and judicial officials to receive proper training on arrest rights under the Supreme Court’s guidelines and Article 22(1) of the Constitution. It also directed that a copy of the order be sent to the Chief Justice and the Additional Chief Secretary of the Home Department to ensure necessary compliance moving forward.
Leave a Comment