Retired Bombay High Court judge Justice G.S. Patel’s family has allegedly faced threats and violence for ten months across two continents, linked to his landmark April 2024 judgment in the Dawoodi Bohra succession dispute.
Justice (retired) G.S. Patel’s family has, for the past ten months, been subjected to threats and instances of violence on two continents connected to his landmark April 23, 2024 judgment resolving the succession dispute within the Dawoodi Bohra community.
The most recent incident occurred on June 5.
The latest demand made to Justice Patel’s family is that he retract his April 23, 2024 ruling by posting a YouTube video an unprecedented move in the history of Indian jurisprudence, particularly when it concerns the decisions of a constitutional court.
Last week, on June 5, Patel’s daughter in London, Aditi Patel, received an anonymous letter stating,
“You were given ample warning. The gang has been paid. The next step involves cremation of you and your family. You can cancel the contract by doing what you were told in the last letter. Attached is a chip that shows what happens because you chose not to comply.”
The letter, purportedly sent from Germany and bearing a German stamp, was mailed from a false London address using the name “Dye Sun Ent: Die Soon Enterprises.”
An SD card attached to the letter has been seized by Hertfordshire police as part of their investigation.
Justice Patel said he has written to the Indian High Commissioner in London and the acting Chief Justice of the Bombay High Court, and has also informed the Chief Justice of India, Surya Kant, about the matter.
He added,
“I have been retired since April 2024. A judgment of the Bombay High Court cannot be recanted by a YouTube video,”
This pattern of threats and violence began in August of the previous year. In Mumbai, Patel’s wife, Malashri Patel, received a letter at their home.
It said,
“We are a powerful guild of the DB (Dawoodi Bohra) community members interested in justice being served for our community…We have employed a very capable and dangerous syndicate who carried out the warning in London…”
The letter was neither signed nor dated. At roughly the same time in London, Patel’s daughter Aditi received a similar message, which additionally claimed responsibility for a break-in at her home in a London suburb in August 2025.
Then, on April 22 this year, while her daughter was out on a school run, a masked man approached her from behind and assaulted her, breaking her nose and leaving her bloodied on the road. Police in the West Hertfordshire area are reviewing the April 22 assault as part of their investigation.
Mark Clawson, Detective Superintendent at Hertfordshire Constabulary, confirmed that threats against Aditi Patel and the attack were being investigated, but declined to provide further details, stating, “The case is a live investigation.”
Officials at the Indian High Commission in London said they were aware of the case and that they had taken appropriate steps to assist Justice Patel’s family.
The alleged campaign of threats and violence is linked to Patel’s April 2024 judgment, which determined who the community’s true spiritual head is an issue that has deeply divided the Dawoodi Bohra community.
After the death of Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin, the 52nd spiritual and temporal leader of the Dawoodi Bohra community in Mumbai, in 2014, a suit was filed in the Bombay High Court challenging the appointment of Burhanuddin’s son, Syedna Mufaddal Saifuddin, as the next Dai al-Mutlaq (supreme leader).
The original challenger was Burhanuddin’s brother, Khuzaima Qutbuddin. After Khuzaima’s death in 2016, the case was pursued by his cousin, Taher Fakhruddin.
On April 23, 2024, Justice Patel dismissed the suit brought by the Taher Fakhruddin-led Qutbi Bohra faction, citing a lack of credible proof of divine authority, and upheld Syedna Mufaddal Saifuddin as the rightful 53rd Dai al-Mutlaq. The Fakhruddin faction has since appealed the decision before a division bench of the Bombay High Court.
In a separate proceeding, a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court is hearing another major matter relating to the religious practice of khatna among the Dawoodi Bohras (Sunita Tiwari v Union of India). Activists argue that FGM violates human rights and bodily integrity.
Meanwhile, one of the intervening groups, the Dawoodi Bohra Women’s Association for Religious Freedom (DBWRF), claims that FMG is a harmless cultural practice.
One of the letters sent to the Patel family also refers to the FGM case. It says, referring to Justice Patel,
“Your cowardice has enabled the defendant (the Syedna Mufaddal Saifuddin faction) to continue to employ violence, threats and coercion tactics upon community members to fleece them for as much as he can and force them to follow reprehensible practices such as FGM etc., and most importantly, to change the true Dawoodi Bohra doctrine to suit his purposes. We will not allow this to continue.”
ALSO READ: Delhi Judge Scolds Prosecutor Over Courtroom Outburst During Riot Trial
Justice Patel said that filing an appeal is the appropriate legal course,
“The appeal mechanism, which the Qutbi faction is already actively using, is the only correct legal route to challenge a judgment. Thus, the demands (to release a video going back on his verdict) exist not as a genuine attempt to correct a legal outcome, but purely as a coercion instrument: to manufacture false evidence of judicial corruption that could influence the appeal, and to humiliate and break a judge who did his duty faithfully.”
He also said that the threats against him and his family were calibrated in a way that exploited the jurisdictional divide between India and the UK.
Patel stated that, despite diligently pursuing the official chain of command, the threat against his family continued.
He said,
“I have approached the authorities, and no one has rebuffed me. I also understand that the jurisdictional remit of the authorities is limited to India. But then this would be a systemic failure. A judge is expected to work without fear or favour, but who will want to be a judge if they and their family members face such threats?”