The Gujarat High Court has dismissed a plea filed by Shweta Bhatt, wife of former Indian Police Service (IPS) officer Sanjiv Bhatt, seeking to prevent his transfer from Palanpur jail to any other prison.
The court ruled that Bhatt has no absolute right to demand incarceration in a particular facility.
Sanjiv Bhatt, an IIT Mumbai graduate and Gujarat-cadre IPS officer, has been at the centre of a long legal battle involving allegations of custodial death, drug charges, and his eventual dismissal from service.
Rejecting the plea, the High Court said Bhatt’s temporary stay at Palanpur jail was due to his under-trial status in an NDPS case and that, following his conviction, he was required to serve his life sentence at Rajkot Central Jail as per government rules. Prisoners from Jamnagar district, where Bhatt was earlier posted and convicted in a custodial death case, are typically housed in Rajkot jail.
The state government argued that the petitioner could not seek a specific place of detention.
Upholding this view, the court observed: “…this Court is of considered view that the husband of the petitioner having no absolute right to seek jail transfer. If we accept the arguments made by learned counsel for the petitioner, then also, prisoner should not be transferred pending appeal. Hence, in view of the above, Rule 9 would not avail any assistance to the husband of the petitioner… The place of detention is a matter of administration’s choice of detaining authority… he is required to be detained in Rajkot Central Jail and he is lodged at Rajkot jail,” reported Vibes of India.
The court further noted that Bhatt’s transfer to Palanpur jail had been a temporary administrative decision during the NDPS trial, and since the trial had concluded, he was moved back to Rajkot to continue serving his life term.
“Hence, considering the aforesaid facts… no arbitrariness or malafide appears from the State order… Convict/prisoner having no absolute right to ask for to lodge or detain him in a particular place or in a jail,” the court added.
Bhatt was first sentenced to life imprisonment by the Jamnagar sessions court on June 20, 2019, in connection with a custodial death case. Later, on March 27, 2024, the Banaskantha sessions court convicted him in an NDPS (drug peddling) case.
In the 1990 custodial death case, Bhatt and constable Vajubhai Chau—whose case was abated after his death—were charged under sections 330 and 324 of the Indian Penal Code based on a complaint filed by one Naran Jadav, who alleged that he was tortured in police custody to extract a confession in a Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act (TADA) and Arms Act case.
Reports indicate that Bhatt continues to maintain a rigorous daily exercise routine of nearly three hours, including yoga postures such as sarvangasana, shirshasana, and chakrasana.
The court, while rejecting his plea, remarked that “Bhatt was in active touch with leaders of rival political parties, was being tutored by NGOs, was involved in politics and activism of creating pressure, even upon 3-judge bench of this court, amicus and many others.”
Bhatt’s prolonged legal troubles and imprisonment continue to draw national attention, with his wife’s latest petition marking another failed attempt to challenge the state’s administrative decisions regarding his detention.
The court ruled that Bhatt has no absolute right to demand incarceration in a particular facility.
Sanjiv Bhatt, an IIT Mumbai graduate and Gujarat-cadre IPS officer, has been at the centre of a long legal battle involving allegations of custodial death, drug charges, and his eventual dismissal from service.
Rejecting the plea, the High Court said Bhatt’s temporary stay at Palanpur jail was due to his under-trial status in an NDPS case and that, following his conviction, he was required to serve his life sentence at Rajkot Central Jail as per government rules. Prisoners from Jamnagar district, where Bhatt was earlier posted and convicted in a custodial death case, are typically housed in Rajkot jail.
The state government argued that the petitioner could not seek a specific place of detention.
Upholding this view, the court observed: “…this Court is of considered view that the husband of the petitioner having no absolute right to seek jail transfer. If we accept the arguments made by learned counsel for the petitioner, then also, prisoner should not be transferred pending appeal. Hence, in view of the above, Rule 9 would not avail any assistance to the husband of the petitioner… The place of detention is a matter of administration’s choice of detaining authority… he is required to be detained in Rajkot Central Jail and he is lodged at Rajkot jail,” reported Vibes of India.
The court further noted that Bhatt’s transfer to Palanpur jail had been a temporary administrative decision during the NDPS trial, and since the trial had concluded, he was moved back to Rajkot to continue serving his life term.
“Hence, considering the aforesaid facts… no arbitrariness or malafide appears from the State order… Convict/prisoner having no absolute right to ask for to lodge or detain him in a particular place or in a jail,” the court added.
Bhatt was first sentenced to life imprisonment by the Jamnagar sessions court on June 20, 2019, in connection with a custodial death case. Later, on March 27, 2024, the Banaskantha sessions court convicted him in an NDPS (drug peddling) case.
In the 1990 custodial death case, Bhatt and constable Vajubhai Chau—whose case was abated after his death—were charged under sections 330 and 324 of the Indian Penal Code based on a complaint filed by one Naran Jadav, who alleged that he was tortured in police custody to extract a confession in a Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act (TADA) and Arms Act case.
Reports indicate that Bhatt continues to maintain a rigorous daily exercise routine of nearly three hours, including yoga postures such as sarvangasana, shirshasana, and chakrasana.
The court, while rejecting his plea, remarked that “Bhatt was in active touch with leaders of rival political parties, was being tutored by NGOs, was involved in politics and activism of creating pressure, even upon 3-judge bench of this court, amicus and many others.”
Bhatt’s prolonged legal troubles and imprisonment continue to draw national attention, with his wife’s latest petition marking another failed attempt to challenge the state’s administrative decisions regarding his detention.

The Crossbill News Desk
Comments (0)
Leave a Comment