The special CBI court on Tuesday rejected a bail application of the former deputy commissioner of Ahmedabad police, Abhay Chudasma, arrested in connection with the Sohrabuddin alleged fake encounter case.
Mr. Chudasma had sought 10 weeks' bail and permission to undergo a hip surgery in a private hospital.
CBI judge G.K. Upadhyaya, however, said the arrested officer could undergo the surgery at the government civil hospital as per medical advice. The court said the “purpose of the law” would be served better if the arrested officer went to the government hospital which was well-equipped and was in a position to meet the requirements.
The CBI had all along opposed his bail plea and was insistent that he should be allowed to undergo the surgery only at the government hospital. In case the court agreed to his request for a private hospital, the CBI advocate had insisted that he should not be allowed to meet anyone in the hospital, except his immediate family members including his wife, daughter and father.
The investigating agency also opposed allowing him 10-week bail and argued that he be granted only six weeks as required for the surgery. The four weeks he had sought for undergoing physiotherapy could be availed at the government hospital while in judicial custody.
No cooperation
CBI sources said the agency opposed Mr. Chudasma's bail because the police officer was not cooperating in the probe and instead trying to hinder it at every stage. The reported “new evidence” the CBI had stumbled upon — indicating his “involvement” in the alleged fake encounter right from the beginning — had further hardened its attitude to the arrested IPS officer.
The statements made by two alleged history-sheeters, Nuru Ghoghani and Mahendrasinh Jhala, who were believed to be assisting Sohrabuddin Sheikh in running his “extortion racket,” indicate that Abhay Chudasma might have planned the fake encounter well in advance and made preparations for it.
The CBI believed that Mr. Chudasma was hand-in-glove with Sohrabuddin and often used his extortion racket for his personal benefits. The statements made before the CID (Crime) when it was in charge of the Sohrabuddin investigation, were earlier claimed to be “missing” but were later “recovered” by the CBI.
In one of the statements, Nuru Ghoghani had told the investigating agency that two pistols they had used in extorting money from a builder in Ahmedabad were later seized by the police but the official records show only one pistol seizure.
