Logo

Gujarat High Court Judge Recuses From Hearing Journalist Ravi Nair’s Anticipatory Bail Plea in Adani-Related FIR

CB News Desk
Add Court Book as a preferred source on Google

The Gujarat High Court judge recused himself from journalist Ravi Nair's anticipatory bail hearing in a forgery case linked to documents shared about the Adani Group. - Ravi Nair v. State of Gujarat

Gujarat High Court Judge Recuses From Hearing Journalist Ravi Nair’s Anticipatory Bail Plea in Adani-Related FIR

The Gujarat High Court on Friday, November 6, recused itself from hearing journalist Ravi Nair’s anticipatory bail plea in a criminal case arising from documents he shared on social media in connection with a Washington Post investigation into the Adani Group.

Justice Sanjeev J. Thaker declined to hear the matter after learning that it was also connected with a defamation dispute involving the Adani Group.

During the hearing, the judge asked,

“Is this something to do with defamation also?” After the respondent’s counsel answered in the affirmative, Justice Thaker stated, “Not before me.”
Court Book subscription: bare acts, legal drafts, court judgments and ad-free legal news, plans from ₹30/month

Background

The case relates to an investigative report co-authored by Nair and published in The Washington Post. The report alleged that the Central Government had advanced a proposal for an investment of approximately USD 3.9 billion by the Life Insurance Corporation of India (LIC) in Adani Group companies.

After LIC publicly denied the report, Nair responded on X by sharing screenshots of certain documents. Adani Ports and Special Economic Zone Limited subsequently raised allegations that the documents were fabricated and lodged a criminal complaint.

Based on the complaint, an FIR was registered at the D.C.B. Police Station, Crime Branch, Ahmedabad City, under Sections 318(4), 336(2), 336(4) and 340(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

Nair approached the High Court after a sessions court rejected his anticipatory bail application last month. He argued that the cheating provision had been added despite its essential legal requirements not being satisfied.

His plea further stated that the investigation primarily concerned verification of documents already available with the investigating agency. He also claimed to have cooperated with investigators and argued that custodial interrogation was unnecessary.

Advocates Abhik Chimni and Ronith Joy appeared for Nair. However, Justice Thaker recused himself after the connection with the defamation proceedings was brought to his attention.

The court did not examine the merits of the anticipatory bail application.

Take CourtBook Everywhere

Access your account on the go with our mobile app.

Get it on Google PlayDownload on the App Store
Join the Court Book WhatsApp channel for latest judgments, notifications, legal news and exam updates