The Bombay High Court directed the Centre and Maharashtra government to keep investigation reports on threats and an alleged attack against retired Justice Gautam Patel confidential. The Court ordered sealed preservation of reports, noting the matter relates to threats allegedly linked to a judicial verdict.
The Bombay High Court on Thursday directed the Centre and the Maharashtra government to ensure that investigation reports related to threats and an alleged attack on retired Justice Gautam Patel and members of his family are “not made a matter of discussion and publicity”.
The threats are said to be linked to a verdict Justice Patel delivered about two days before his retirement in April 2024. The decision related to a dispute concerning religious leadership within the Dawoodi Bohra community. The court also instructed that its registry preserve the reports in court records in a sealed envelope.
On June 15, a Bench of Acting Chief Justice Ravindra V Ghuge and Justice Gautam A Ankhad asked Deven Bharati, Commissioner of Police, Mumbai, to oversee the investigation and submit a status report on the threats. The Court was informed that Justice Patel had filed a complaint regarding the threats at the Gamdevi police station in South Mumbai.
On Thursday, while the Union government submitted a report describing steps taken to provide protection to the former judge and his family members in the United Kingdom, Mumbai police submitted a report from its Additional Commissioner detailing protective measures within India and updates on the alleged incidents under investigation.
The court noted in its order,
“In order to ensure that the steps being taken by the Union Ministry of External Affairs (MEA), Indian High Commission in London and Mumbai Police are not a matter of discussion or publicity, we are placing both these reports in a sealed envelope to be preserved as records of the proceedings,”
The Bench was hearing a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by the Bombay Bar Association, the Advocates Association of Western India, and the Bombay Incorporated Law Society. The petitioners sought a comprehensive, High Court-monitored investigation into the threats and attack, to be conducted by a Special Investigation Team (SIT) headed by a retired Supreme Court or High Court judge.
Acting Chief Justice Ghuge reminded the authorities about the live media coverage of the 26/11 Mumbai terror attacks in 2008. The Bench orally observed:
The judge orally remarked,
“The visuals from Trident Hotel and Cama Hospital were getting telecast, and they (attackers) got to know how the investigation was being done. The reports (on alleged threats against retired judge and family) are only to convince us that something proper is done. We do not want everyone to know how it is being done and the issue is being tackled,”
After the petitioners’ counsel requested that the matter be posted after four weeks, citing that the Centre and Mumbai police are making progress and “will be in a position to submit a further status report on the adjourned date,” the High Court scheduled the next hearing for August 7.
Background: The Dawoodi Bohra Succession Dispute
The controversy traces its roots to one of the most significant religious succession battles in modern Indian legal history. The dispute arose following the death of Mohammad Burhanuddin, the 52nd Syedna and spiritual leader of the Dawoodi Bohra community.
Following his demise, his son, Mufaddal Saifuddin, assumed leadership as the 53rd Syedna. However, his claim was challenged by Khuzaima Qutbuddin, the half-brother of the late Syedna, who contended that he had been validly designated as the successor.
As competing claims emerged, the matter eventually reached the Bombay High Court in 2014. What followed was one of the longest and most closely watched civil trials in recent years, involving extensive documentary evidence, witness testimony, and examination of centuries-old religious traditions governing succession within the Dawoodi Bohra community.
The proceedings continued for nearly nine years before Justice Patel delivered his judgment on April 23, 2024. In a detailed ruling, he concluded that Mufaddal Saifuddin had successfully established his claim and was the lawful and rightful 53rd Dai al-Mutlaq and spiritual head of the Dawoodi Bohra community.
Despite the High Court’s ruling, the dispute has not reached its final conclusion. The judgment remains under challenge before a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court, where the appeal is presently pending consideration.
It is against this backdrop that the allegations of threats and attacks have assumed significance. Members of the legal fraternity have expressed concern that attempts to intimidate a judge or his family over a judicial decision could have a chilling effect on judicial independence and the administration of justice.
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE