The Gujarat high court on Monday dismissed a plea filed by journalist Mahesh Langa seeking quashing of an FIR registered against him for allegedly stealing "highly sensitive and confidential documents" belonging to Gujarat Maritime Board.
The court of Justice Divyesh Joshi rejected the plea stating that, prima facie, the involvement of the petitioner in committing the crime was made out from the material collected by the investigating officer during the probe.
"Moreover, the investigation is at a nascent stage and it would not be proper on the part of this court to exercise its inherent powers in favour of the petitioner at this stage," the order said.
The fact remains that "highly sensitive and confidential documents of Gujarat Maritime Board, which are not even provided to any person under Right to Information Act" were recovered and seized from the petitioner's premises, the HC said.
The petitioner had sought quashing of the FIR lodged against him and an unidentified official of GMB under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita sections pertaining to theft, criminal conspiracy, bribing a public servant and criminal misconduct by a public servant as well as provisions of Prevention of Corruption Act.
As per the prosecution, the Ahmedabad Crime Branch had seized documents belonging to GMB from Langa and lodged an FIR against him and an unknown person on October 7, 2024 after the inquiry revealed these were given to the accused by a GMB employee.
The seizure was made when police searched Langa's premises in connection with another FIR filed by Ahmedabad Crime Branch against various firms for alleged creation of bills without supply to avail Input Tax Credit and fake GST registration.
Langa was booked as he was proprietor of one such firm, DA Enterprise.
Appearing for Langa, senior advocate Kapil Sibal had said the petitioner was not directly or indirectly connected with the commission of crime in question, and no official responsible for passing on the documents to him has been arrested till date.
He said if the documents are of "highly sensitive nature," then provisions of Official Secrets Act 1923 were required to be added by the complainant, which was not the case, showing that the FIR was filed with a sole intent to harass the petitioner.
Sibal said the prosecuting agency had imagined that the petitioner paid a bribe to obtain the said documents from a government employee while invoking provisions of Prevention of Corruption Act, even when it was not yet clear who delivered the document.
Opposing the plea, Additional Advocate General Mitesh Amin said the petitioner has been apprehended in another FIR and the investigation was at a nascent stage, adding that another accused will be arrested in no time.
Since the documents were found from the petitioner's custody, his prima facie involvement in the commission of crime was clear, Amin said.
© 2025