Gujarat

Gujarat HC Orders FIR in DGFT Official’s Custodial Death, Sets 3-Month Deadline For Probe

By GS Team
4 Oct 20262 mins read
TukuTouch Logo
Gujarat High Court orders FIR in DGFT official Jawri Mal Bishnoi's custodial death case. Bishnoi died after a CBI bribery trap. His family alleges foul play, rejecting accident/suicide claims and citing prolonged custody and harassment. The court mandates a DIG, CID Crime-supervised probe, emphasizing an FIR is crucial despite prior inquiries, with a three-month deadline for a comprehensive report.

Summarized by AI; it may make mistakes. Check important info

Gujarat HC Orders FIR in DGFT Official’s Custodial Death, Sets 3-Month Deadline For Probe
Image : AI Generated Representative image

The Gujarat High Court has ordered the registration of an FIR in the custodial death case of Jawri Mal Bishnoi, then Joint Director General of Foreign Trade (DGFT) in Rajkot, and directed that the investigation be conducted under the direct supervision of the DIG, CID Crime.

Justice Moksha K. Thakker directed the investigating agency to complete the probe within three months and submit a comprehensive report before the High Court.

DGFT Official Died After CBI Bribery Trap

Bishnoi died on March 25, 2023, a day after the CBI’s Anti-Corruption Branch conducted a trap operation at his office in connection with an alleged ₹9 lakh bribe demand.

According to the CBI’s allegations, ₹5 lakh was recovered during the trap and Bishnoi was arrested. CBI officials subsequently conducted a search at his residence.

The following morning, while the proceedings were still underway, Bishnoi reportedly fell from the fourth floor of the building. He sustained serious injuries and later died.

Family Rejects Accident Theory

Bishnoi’s wife, Suman Bishnoi, rejected the claim that the fall was an accident or that he had died by suicide. The family levelled serious allegations against the CBI officials and claimed that Bishnoi had remained in custody for nearly 19 hours.

The family also alleged that he was subjected to harassment during custody and that due legal procedures were not followed.

High Court Says Inquiry Cannot Replace FIR Investigation

The High Court took note of the police inquiry, departmental inquiry and magisterial investigation already conducted in the case.

The court observed that when the material available indicates the commission of a cognisable offence, police cannot avoid registering an FIR merely because other inquiries have already been conducted.

The court also made it clear that a magisterial inquiry cannot be treated as a substitute for a police investigation.

CID Crime DIG To Supervise Probe

The High Court has now placed the investigation under the direct supervision of the DIG, CID Crime, with directions to complete the probe within three months and place the full investigation report before the court.

The court stressed that cases involving alleged violations of constitutional rights in custody require a distinct and proactive approach.