IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION I.A NO OF 2018 WRIT PETITION (C) NO. 19 OF 2018 NEW DELHI PETITIONER

Similar documents
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION M.A. NO. OF 2018 I.A NO OF 2018 WRIT PETITION (C) NO.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CIVIL APPEAL NO OF 2016 (Arising out of SLP (C) No.

INDIA Harjit Singh: In continuing pursuit of justice

J U D G M E N T (Arising out of SLP(Crl.) No. 5124/06) A.K. MATHUR, J.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CIVIL APPEAL NO Of 2011 SRI MAHABIR PROSAD CHOUDHARY...APPELLANT(S) VERSUS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED:

1. That the Petitioner is filing the present writ petition as a Public. Interest Litigation under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for

MAHARASHTRA ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION

ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL, REGIONAL BENCH, LUCKNOW COURT NO 2. OA 274/2014 with MA 1802/2014. Thursday, this the 16th of Feb 2015

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT :SERVICE MATTER WP(C) No.8133/2011 & CM No.2004/2012 Date of Decision:

Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987, being aggrieved by the judgment. dated , passed by the Member (Technical), Railway Claims

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI WP( C ) NO (IN THE MATTER OF PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION)

Bar&Bench (

Cr.M.P. No of Putul Rani Dey 2. Ravi Chandra Dey 3. Ashish Dey 4. Sangam Dey... Petitioners CORAM :- HON BLE MR. JUSTICE D.K.

-1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO OF 2010

CORAM : HON BLE MR.JUSTICE VIRENDER SINGH, CHIEF JUSTICE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE P.P. BHATT. For the Appellant

IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN PENAL CODE CRL.REV.P. 76/2009 Reserved on: 30th April, 2012 Decided on: 11th July, 2012

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM & ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH)

Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 136 of 2000(R)

REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 308 OF Venkatesan.Appellant. Versus J U D G M E N T

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI ABA No of 2013

Sultanabegum vs State Of Maharashtra on 8 February, 2007

SYNOPSIS. By this present Writ Petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of. India, the Petitioners are seeking to challenge the manner in which

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CRIMINAL APPEAL NO OF 2015 (Arising out of S.L.P. (Crl.) No of 2015) Versus

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE. Crl.M.C. 638/2009 & Crl.M.A.2384/09 (stay) Date of reserve:

REGISTRAR GENERAL, SUPREME COURT OF INDIA... Respondents Through: Mr. Vikas Pahwa, Standing Counsel for CBI with Mr. Tarun Verma, Advocate.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU BEFORE. THE HON BLE Mr. JUSTICE L. NARAYANA SWAMY CRIMINAL PETITION NO.5144 OF 2015

Nagpur Bench at Nagpur allowing Criminal Application No.380 of preferred by the first respondent and thereby quashing the

W.P. (C) No of 2005

IN THE HIGH COURT MANIPUR AT IMPHAL. Writ Petition(C) No. 543 Of 2013

K.K. MISHRA.APPELLANT(S) VERSUS JUDGMENT. 2. By the order impugned, the High Court. of Madhya Pradesh has negatived the challenge

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CIVIL APPEAL No.11249/2018 [Arising out of SLP (CIVIL) No.

Bar & Bench (

THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE B.K. SHARMA

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % Date of Decision: Versus

IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (High Court of Assam, Nagaland, Mizoram and Arunachal Pradesh ) Crl.Appeal No.101 of 2009

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.REV.P.403/2003 & CRL.M.A.717/2003

IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MEGHALAYA, MANIPUR, TRIPURA AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) W.P(C) 2085/2004

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr.M.P. No

IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI COMPANY JURISDICTION. CCP (Co.) No. 8 of 2008 COMPANY PETITION NO. 215 OF 2005

IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) WP (C) No of 2015

Draft of Public Interest Writ Petition Against Restrictions on Withdrawals from Bank Accounts

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI (CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION) Writ Petition (Civil) No... Of 2013

THE REPRESENTATION OF THE PEOPLE ACT 1958

$~45 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. Judgment delivered on:10 th September, 2015

Case No. 02 of Shri V. P. Raja, Chairman Shri S. B. Kulkarni, Member Shri V. L. Sonavane, Member

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SERVICE MATTER. Writ Petition (Civil) No of Judgment reserved on : November 05, 2008

1. OA 38/

CDJ 2010 SC 546 JUSTICE CYRIAC JOSEPH

IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD DISTRICT: AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO OF 2008 AND AND AND AND AND. In the matter between;

* THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 1089/2013 & CM No.2073/2013. Versus

BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL (WESTERN ZONE) BENCH, PUNE APPLICATION NO.35 OF 2014 HON BLE SHRI JUSTICE V.R. KINGAONKAR (JUDICIAL MEMBER)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 158 OF 2012 IN. CIVIL APPEAL NO.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO OF 2018 VERSUS

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 6105/2011. % SADHNA BHARDWAJ.. Petitioner Through: Mr. Dipak Bhattarcharya, Adv.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN PENAL CODE. Judgment delivered on : CRL.REV.P.275/2006.

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

1. Writ Petition (C) No.3638 of 2015

IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) WP (C) No of 2013

NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH (DELHI)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : BID. Writ Petition (Civil) No.8529 of Judgment reserved on: January 13, 2008

SUPREME COURT UPHOLDS PASSIVE EUTHANASIA, ISSUES GUIDELINES ON ADVANCE DIRECTIVES IN LANDMARK JUDGEMENT

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL CENTRAL ZONAL BENCH, BHOPAL. Original Application No. 27/2014 (CZ)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. WP(C) No.7716/2011. Date of Decision: Through Mr.Subhashish Mohanty, Advocate.

WP(C) No.169/2015 BEFORE THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MAHESHWARI CHIEF JUSTICE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R. SEN

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI. Cr. M.P. No. 944 of 2009

THE TRANSPLANTATION OF HUMAN ORGANS (AMENDMENT) BILL, 2009

IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT. Writ Petition (C) No.606 of 2016

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CRL.L.P. 316/2013 DATE OF DECISION :

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION. WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) No. 129 OF 2015 VERSUS J U D G M E N T

THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % Judgment delivered on: M/S MITSUBISHI CORPORATION INDIA P. LTD Petitioner.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION. I.A. Nos of 2005 WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 202 OF 1995 VERSUS

GOVERNMENT OF MAHARASHTRA

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 636 OF 2017 [Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No.

THE CONSTITUTION (AMENDMENT) BILL, Explanatory Note (These notes form no part of the Bill but are intended only to indicate its general purport)

...Petitioner. Versus PAPER BOOK. Of 2015:- Application for permission to file SLP. of 2015:- Application for exemption from.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO OF Society Ltd (IPRS)..Petitioner Vs.

Sub: In the matter of representation in compliance to the directions of Hon ble High Court, Jabalpur in Writ Petition no.

Bar & Bench (

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

Case No. 99 of Smt. Chandra Iyengar, Chairperson Shri Vijay. L. Sonavane, Member Shri. Azeez M. Khan, Member

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD. Civil Misc. Writ Petition No of Decided On:

Case No. 224 of Coram. Shri. I.M. Bohari, Member Shri. Mukesh Khullar, Member. M/s. Vidarbha Industries Power Ltd (VIPL-G)

Intest.Cas.5 of 2004

IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM: NAGALAND: MEGHALAYA: MANIPUR: TRIPURA: MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION PIL WRIT PETITION NO.70 OF 2006

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION. TRANSFER PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 567 of 2017 JANHIT MANCH & ANR...PETITIONER(S) VERSUS WITH

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN PENAL CODE CRL.M.C. No. 233/2014 Date of decision: 14th February, 2014.

HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. No. 41/Rules/DHC Dated : PRACTICE DIRECTIONS

M.A.C. App. No. 8 of 2017

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT AT GUWAHATI (The High Court of Assam, Nagaland, Mizoram and Arunachal Pradesh) PRINCIPAL SEAT AT GUWAHATI

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : BORDER SECURITY FORCE ACT, 1968 Date of Decision: W.P.(C) No.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 4 TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2015 BEFORE THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE K.N.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : TENDER MATTER. Writ Petition (Civil) No.8321 of 2008 WITH

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : RAILWAY CLAIMS TRIBUNAL ACT, 1987 FAO No. 421/2012 DATE OF DECISION : 8th January, 2014

Transcription:

1 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION I.A NO. 14870-14871 OF 2018 IN WRIT PETITION (C) NO. 19 OF 2018 In the matter of: TEHSEEN POONAWALLA S/o SARFARAZ POONAWALLA R/o A-46, SOUTH EX. -II, TOP FLOOR, NEW DELHI 110049 PETITIONER VERSUS 1. UNION OF INDIA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, NORTH BLOCK, CABINET SECRETARIAT, NEW DELHI 110001 RESPONDENT NO. 1 2. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH CHIEF SECRETARY, MANTRALAYA, MUMBAI-400032 MAHARASHTRA RESPONDENT NO. 2 AND IN THE MATTER OF: ADMIRAL MR. LAXMINARAYAN RAMDAS (RETD.) S/O LATE SHRI C.K. LAXMINARAYAN R/O LARA RAMU FARM,

2 VILLAGE BHAIMALA, PO KAMARLE, ALIBAG-402209, DIST RAIGAD, MAHARASHTRA.APPLICANT/INTERVENER WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS ON THE INCONSISTENCIES IN DOCUMENTS TENDERED BY STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND INCORRECT PROCEDURE BY THE POLICE IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF JUDGE B.H. LOYA S DEATH PREPARED BY MS. INDIRA JAISING, SENIOR ADVOCATE The following circumstances create a suspicion that Judge Loya s death was not a natural death: 1. There is no entry of Judge Loya having stayed at Ravi Bhawan in the occupancy register for 30.11.2014 to 01.12.2014, despite the fact that several other VIPs names find entry in the occupancy register. This creates suspicion as to whether he stayed there at all. The enlarged Photos of the relevant pages of the occupancy register of Ravi Bhawan have been handed over. 2. The statement of Judge S.M. Modak (Page 48 Maharashtra Documents) that three judges stayed in Room No. 10 in Ravi Bhawan is unbelievable, considering that it is a room of 2 beds only, and further considering that there were other vacant rooms in Ravi Bhawan. Photographs of Room no. 10 are annexed herewith as Annexure-1 [Page to ]. 3. Despite the presence of 2 judicial officers (Judge Shrikant Kulkarni and Judge S.M. Modak) at the time when Judge Loya is alleged to have complained of pain in the chest and 4 judicial officers (Judge Kulkarni, Judge Modak, Judge Vijay C. Barde, Judge R.R. Rathi) were present in the hospital, his name is spelt wrongly in the records of both the hospitals, i.e. Dande Hospital and Meditrina Hospital, as also in the Post Mortem Report prepared by Civil Surgeon of the Government Medical College. In the place of Brijgopal he has been described as Brijmohan (Name incorrectly spelled on Page(s) 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 22, 24, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 42, 43, 54 Maharashtra Documents).

3 4. The ECG that is alleged to have been done at Dande Hospital has not been produced before this Hon ble Court by the State of Maharashtra. There is a copy of the ECG purported to be done/conducted on Judge Loya in Dande Hospital which bears the date of 30 th November 2014 available in the Indian Express newspaper report on 27.11.2014. The said news report also recorded that when Dr. Pinak Dande was asked about the discrepancy in the data, he said The date November 30 appearing on the ECG may have been due to a technical glitch arising out of a machine calibration issue. His statement is contradicted by the statement of Judge R.R. Rathi (Page 52-53 Maharashtra Documents) which says At that time the doctor tried to do his ECG but the nodes of the ECG machine were broken. Doctor tried and wasted some time but machine was not working. I think he gave 2 injections to Mr. Loya. I asked the doctor he said it of antacid and painkiller. Judge R.R. Rathi s statement casts a doubt on the medical records of Dande Hospital and Meditrina Hospital in as much as it clearly indicates that no ECG was done at Dande Hospital. 5. The Doctor s progress report at Meditrina Hospital refers to an ECG being done of Judge Loya (Page 16 Maharashtra Documents). No such ECG has been produced on record by the State of Maharashtra. 6. An accident report is generated at Sitabardi P.S. at 08:30 a.m. is by way of information given by Dr. Prashant Rathi (Page 19 Maharashtra Documents) under Section 174 Cr.P.C. It was obligatory at 08:30 a.m. for the police to notify the Executive Magistrate which has not been done (See section 174 Cr.P.C.). The consequence of this is that the Executive Magistrate has been deprived of an opportunity to visit the hospital, if he so deems fit, and make his own observations. 7. It appears that a Death Investigation Report under Section 174 Cr.P.C. was generated - conducted from 10:00 a.m. 10:30 a.m. (at Page 22-23 Maharashtra Documents) addressed to Government Medical College, Nagpur. The document states that the death must be heart attack. However to ascertain the actual cause of death, we are sending the dead body with PC Pankaj B. No. 6238 for Post-Mortem along with necessary papers.

4 There is no mention about what were the papers accompanying the death investigation report. The letter states However to ascertain the actual reason/cause of death, the dead body is sent to the Medical Officer [LMJ Saheb, Medical Hospital] It is important to note however, that the Executive Magistrate has not been informed of the death having occurred as required by Section 174 Cr.P.C. 8. Thereafter it appears that from 10:55 a.m. 11:55 a.m. a Post-Mortem was conducted (see Page 24-32 Maharashtra Documents) where the cause of death is recorded as Coronary Artery Insufficiency (Page 31 Maharashtra Documents). 9. The following are the discrepancies in the Post-Mortem Report of Judge Loya (Page 24-32 Maharashtra Documents) - a. Post-Mortem Report [Page 25] has been altered by correcting the name on 10 th January, 2015: b. Post-Mortem Report [Page 25] shows the date of death is 07.12.2014 with no explanation. c. Post-Mortem Report [Page 25] shows overwriting on the date of death from 30.11.2014 to 01.12.2014. d. The cause of death has been shown as Coronary Artery Insufficiency [Page 31]. 10. Thereafter it appears that at Page 33 Maharashtra Documents, dead body of Brijmohan Harkishan Loya was handed over from P.S. Sitabardi to Dr. Prashant Rathi. Although there is mention at Page 33 that all his belongings for performing last rites was handed over to Dr. Prashant Rathi, The Panchnama of the personal belongings of the deceased have not been produced. This record acquires relevance in the light of the fact that Judge Loya s sister Anuradha Biyani has alleged that his mobile phone was returned a few days later with all messages deleted (The Caravan news report dated 20.11.2017 at Page 9 Maharashtra Documents). 11. It appears that the Accidental Death case AD 00/14 recorded under Section 174 Cr.P.C. (at Page 19 Maharashtra Documents) was transferred to P.S. Sadar at 04:00 p.m. The Second Accident Report A.D. 44/14 (Page 35-35A Maharashtra Documents) is alleged to have

5 been made at 04:00 p.m. at Sadar Police Station once again under Section 174 Cr.P.C. At this stage also the Executive Magistrate is not informed. 12. The case diary of P.S. Sitabardi or of Sadar Police Station has not been produced which would have indicated: a. The time at which the police received the first call about the death of Justice Loya; b. The time of generating the accident report at Sitabardi police station stated to be 08:30 a.m. (Page 19 Maharashtra Documents); c. The time of the Death Inspection Report (Page 23 Maharashtra Documents) at 10.30 a.m. d. The time of transfer from Sitabardi police station to Sadar Police Station stated to be 04:00 p.m. e. The Medical records, if any, which were available with the police at the time of the First Accident Report at 08:30am, (Page 19 Maharashtra Documents), at the time of the Death Investigation Report at 10:30 am (Page 23 Maharashtra Documents) and the Medical Progress Report (Page 16 Maharashtra Documents), the Medical Records if any sent to the Government Medical College for the Post- Mortem. f. The steps taken by the police to inform the executive magistrate under Section 174 Cr.P.C., if any. 13. It appears that no steps have been taken by the police to collect the additional documents from the two hospitals Dande Hospital and Meditrina Hospital to ascertain the cause of death. The procedure prescribed by law under Section 174 Cr.P.C. has not been followed. It appears that no enquiry has been done by the police or by anyone else at the inquest under Section 174 Cr.P.C., such as, for example - verifying the cause of death, looking at the medical records, summoning medical records of both hospitals, ascertaining the medical history of the deceased with the family to check if there was any prior history of a coronary problem causing coronary artery insufficiency or whether the cause of the heart attack was due to some other reason.

6 14. It is significant to note that Dr. Prashant Rathi is not a relative within the meaning of Section 176 Cr.P.C., which defines relative under Explanation to the Section to mean Explanation. In this section, the expression "relative" means parents, children, brothers, sisters and spouse.. Intimation of the Post-Mortem ought to have been given to the relatives of Judge Loya which was not done. 15. A document dated 02.02.16 has been produced on record as Accidental Death Summary (Page 40-41 Maharashtra Documents) being intimation by the police to the Executive Magistrate. There is no explanation as to why this document has been dated 02.02.2016 without intimating the Executive Magistrate on 01.12.2014 at the time of occurrence of death and what steps were taken since then till 02.02.2016. Therefore the said letter/accidental Death Summary dated 02.02.16 is meaningless. It reinforces the submission that no inquest was conducted under Section 174 of the Cr.P.C. 16. Judge Loya s sister, Anuradha Biyani s version made in The Caravan report dated 20.11.2017 that the ambulance came unaccompanied by any judicial officer is corroborated by the statement of Justice Bhushan Gawai of the Bombay High Court made to the Indian Express in its report dated 27.11.2017. Justice Gawai had stated that the 2 judicial officers who were travelling in their own separate car, with the ambulance carrying the body of Judge Loya, had a break down and were arrived delayed about 15 minutes (see Page 129 I.A. 14870-14871/2018 paperbook). Dr. Anuradha Biyani s statement in the Caravan report dated 20.11.2017 that she was told that judge Loya climbed the stairs to Dande Hospital is corroborated by Judge R.R. Rathi in his statement dated 23.11.2017 to the State Intelligence Officer (Page 52 Maharashtra Documents), lending credibility of her version of the events of 01.12.2014. 17. The version of Dr. Pinak Dande (see page 54 Maharashtra Documents) as also the medical records of Dande Hospital and Meditrina Hospital (see page 16 Maharashtra Documents) that an ECG was done are belied by Judge R.R. Rathi s statement to the State Intelligence Officer, who said that the nodes of the ECG machine were broken (see page 52 Maharashtra Documents).

7 18. The said Article of the Caravan dated 21.11.2017 also notes (at Page 14 Maharashtra Documents) that Judge Loya s son, Anuj Loya has addressed a letter dated 18.02.2015 to the then Chief Justice of Maharashtra High Court calling for an inquiry. The said letter was addressed to his family on the occasion when the then Chief Justice of High Court went to visit the family about two and half months after Judge Loya died. Anuj Loya records in his letter dated 18.02.2015 that he requested the then Chief Justice of High Court to set up an inquiry commission. Copy of the letter dated 18.02.2015 written by Anuj Loya is annexed herewith as Annexure - 2 (Page ). 19. It is submitted that the statements of family members produced by the State of Maharashtra have been taken under duress and do not inspire confidence. 20. Judge J.T. Utpat presiding over the special CBI Court in Sohrabuddin Sheikh encounter trial was transferred on 25.06.2014 with immediate effect, in violation of the order of the Supreme Court of India dated 27.09.2012 reported in CBI v. Amitbhai Anil Chandra Shah [(2012) 10 SCC 545], therefore the records of the Administrative Committee of the High Court must be produced. MS. INDIRA JAISING DATE: 09.02.2018 SENIOR ADVOCATE PLACE: NEW DELHI