Explained: What are the charges against former ASG IH Syed?

The CBI filed its chargesheet in 2013 against some of the top cops of Gujarat who were known as “encounter specialists”, including IPS officers PP Pandey, DG Vanzara, NK Amin and Tarun Barot. In 2012, Syed was appointed by the CBI as a special public prosecutor to represent the CBI in several cases in the state, including that of the alleged fake encounter case of Sadiq Jamal Mehtar who was killed in 2003.

After the Gujarat riots in 2002, Syed also represented some senior Gujarat-cadre officers who went against the administration, such as IPS officers Kuldeep Sharma and Sanjiv Bhatt, and IAS officer Pradeep Sharma. Among others are IPS officers Rahul Sharma (now retired, and a practising advocate at Gujarat HC) and Rajnish Rai (now teaching at IIM-Ahmedabad) and Satish Verma (known for assisting in Ishrat Jahan SIT probe that established that the encounter was fake).

In 2013, Syed was appointed by the Central government as the assistant solicitor general (ASG) at the Gujarat HC and less than a year later in 2014, after BJP came to power at the Centre, he resigned from the post.

In 2019, Syed represented Patidar leader Hardik Patel before the Gujarat HC in his petition seeking a stay on the conviction by a Visnagar court for rioting and arson of present Gujarat Health Minister and Visnagar MLA from BJP Rushikesh Patel so as to permit Hardik to contest elections as a Congress candidate. The HC dismissed the plea, with SC finally staying the conviction earlier this year.

What is the case against him and are there any specific allegations?

Syed, along with five others, are facing allegations of causing hurt, extortion, wrongful confinement and criminal intimidation, among other charges, of Ahmedabad-based businessman Viral Shah, although no specific role has been attributed to Syed. It has been Syed’s case that he was present at the alleged site of the offence in his capacity as a lawyer.

In an FIR lodged at Pethapur police station in Gandhinagar on May 15, Viral alleged that he was called at former Gujarat CM Shankersinh Vaghela’s house at Gandhinagar by Vaghela’s personal assistant Bhaumik Thakkar for signing a business dispute-related settlement agreement and that when he refused to sign it, he was threatened by the accused.

Viral was also allegedly threatened that he will be fixed in a false rape case if he does not sign the agreement. Viral claimed that the accused assaulted him and he then managed to escape with his driver.

Other accused include Vaghela’s PA Bhaumik Thakkar and others involved in the business dispute with Shah — Zankarsinh Solanki (former long-time business partner of Shah), Ravi Chaudhary, Kuren Amin and Ikshit Amin.

An FIR was lodged against Viral and 25 others by Vadodara-based businessman Kuren Amin in December 2021 at Ahmedabad CID Crime branch police station, on charges of cheating, forgery and misappropriation of funds by the accused to the tune of over Rs 100 crores. Viral was arrested in connection with this FIR in March this year and was in judicial custody for 27 days.

Viral had purportedly entered into a settlement with Kuren, following which he was released on bail. As part of the settlement, it was agreed that Viral and other accused in Kuren’s FIR, would pay Rs 20 crore to Kurien’s company, which was represented by senior advocate Syed. Thereafter, a consent quashing petition was filed before the Gujarat HC to quash Kuren’s FIR and in light of the settlement, the FIR was also quashed on May 2.

The Gujarat HC, while granting anticipatory bail, observed that Syed cannot be implicated into the larger business dispute as he was only acting in his capacity of lawyer.

What has happened so far?

A day after the FIR by Viral, Syed moved the Gujarat HC seeking quashing of the FIR and the charges against him. As interim relief he sought for the court’s direction to grant him protection from coercive steps, namely arrest. On June 2, the Gujarat HC refused to grant him protection from arrest and also held the quashing petition to be not maintainable. He had also moved a Gandhinagar court for anticipatory bail, which the trial court rejected on May 30.

Syed also submitted that he has been “deliberately implicated” in the FIR by the complainant Viral so that Viral can “wriggle out of his liability to pay” the settlement amount of Rs 20 crore. Syed also submitted that he is “not averse to investigation” while requesting for protection from arrest.

With the grant of anticipatory bail, Syed remains protected from arrest. The court has struck a reasonable balance between the individual’s right and the investigation authority’s rights.

What next?

With respect to quashing of charges levelled against Syed in the FIR, he can either approach the Supreme Court challenging the Gujarat HC’s rejection on maintainability or file a fresh petition in the Gujarat HC under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with CrPC section 482. He can also move a quashing petition at a later stage before the Gujarat HC under CrPC section 482.