The Bombay High Court has determined that the status reports concerning threats against retired Justice Gautam S Patel and his family will remain confidential, disallowing media dissemination. This decision was made in the case of Bombay Bar Association & Ors v. Union of India & Ors., where a division bench consisting of Acting Chief Justice Ravindra Ghuge and Justice Gautam Ankhad reviewed documents submitted by the Mumbai police and the Union Ministry of External Affairs.
The documents detailed security measures implemented to protect Justice Patel in Mumbai and his family in the United Kingdom. Counsel representing three bar associations, which had petitioned for a comprehensive investigation, were permitted to examine these reports. They returned the documents to the court post-inspection.
In a bid to prevent publicity and ensure the confidentiality of security operations, the court ordered that these reports be sealed and maintained within the court records. Acting Chief Justice Ghuge emphasized that the reports’ purpose was solely to assure the court of proper actions being undertaken, without public disclosure of the specifics.
The court drew parallels to the live broadcast of the 26/11 Mumbai terror attacks, which compromised operational security by revealing real-time details. Similarly, publicizing investigative details could jeopardize current probes and embolden perpetrators, the court noted.
The reports were filed in response to a public interest litigation (PIL) initiated by the Bombay Bar Association, Advocates Association of Western India, and the Bombay Incorporated Law Society. The PIL sought protection for Justice Patel and his family, along with a court-supervised investigation into the threats, allegedly linked to an April 2024 verdict in the Dawoodi Bohra succession dispute.
Justice Patel’s family had received threatening communications, and his daughter in London was physically attacked, resulting in a fractured nose. This incident led to the UK police providing security to the family. The PIL highlighted concerns over judicial independence and the potential chilling effect such threats could have on judges involved in the pending appeal of the Dawoodi Bohra case.
The state government, represented by the government pleader, assured the court that Maharashtra Police had already assigned two personal security officers to Justice Patel and was prepared to implement additional security measures if necessary. The state’s report also noted the registration of two non-cognizable complaints in Mumbai and acknowledged a separate incident in the UK.
The bench directed the continuation of the investigation and scheduled a four-week timeframe for submitting an updated status report. The matter is slated for further hearing on August 7.
Advocate General Milind Sathe and Chief Public Prosecutor Shishir Hiray represented the State, while Additional Solicitor General Anil Singh appeared for the Union of India. Senior Advocate Nitin Thakker represented the Bombay Bar Association.
