The Gujarat High Court on Monday (August 24) refused to suspend the sentence of Aam Aadmi Party MLA from Dediyapada assembly Chaitar Vasava convicted for assaulting and extorting forest officials in a forest land encroachment case wherein he was sentenced by the trial court for seven years. [2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 230]

The court passed the order on applications seeking suspension of sentence moved by three accused–accused nos.1 Jitendrabhai Vasava, 5 Chaitarbhai Damjibhai Vasava and 7 Rikeshbhai Fulsingbhai Vasava, filed in their appeals challenging the conviction by the trial court.

They were convicted under various provisions including IPC Sections 143(Punishment for being a member of an unlawful assembly), 147(Punishment for rioting), 148(Rioting while armed with a deadly weapon), 149(common object), 189(Threat of injury to a public servant to deter them from their duty), 332(Voluntarily causing hurt to deter a public servant from their duty), 353 (Assault or use of criminal force to deter a public servant from discharging their duty), 386 (Extortion by putting a person in fear of death or grievous hurt) among others.

The prosecution claimed that co-accused persons had illegally encroached upon forest land situated in Shoolpaneshwar Wildlife Sanctuary which they were using to cultivate, for which they were warned by the forest officials. A Forest Offence Report was lodged and subsequently, the encroachment was removed by the forest officials on 30.10.2023.

Being aggrieved by the action of the forest officials, the accused nos. 2, 4, 6, 8 and 9 approached Chaitarbhai Vasava, who then called the forest officials to his residence.

Before the trial court, prosecution submitted that when the forest officials visited Vasava's residence, he along with the co-accused, started hurling abuses at the officials and Vasava even slapped the complainant Shivrajbhai Ruvjibhai Chaudhary twice. Putting them under duress and fear of dire consequences, Vasava also asked accused no.7 to bring a pistol and fired a shot in the air.

Thereafter Vasava directed the forest officials to pay the amount as demanded by the co-accused towards compensation for the damages caused by them to their crops and threatened them to face dire consequences if the amount is not paid to them as per their demands.

In another incident, accused no.1, Chaitarbhai Vasava's personal assistant, had twice called the complainant and asked him to come at the Dediapada Peetha Ground. When the complainant along with the witness Umangbhai Fatesinhbhai Vasava (both forest officials) visited the place, accused no.1 demanded an amount of Rs.60,000, failing which he threatened them with dire consequences compelling the officials to pay.

Justice Vimal K Vyas while referring to the material said:

"Thus, upon a prima facie consideration of the material on record, it emerges that the applicant-accused no.1 Jitendrabhai Vasava and the applicant-accused no.5 Chaitarbhai Vasava, acting in concert, threatened and assaulted the forest officials, namely, the complainant (PW-1) Shivrajbhai Chaudhary and the Forestor (PW-2) Umangbhai Vasava, thereby compelling them to arrange and pay an amount of Rs.60,000 as compensation to the accused towards the damages caused to them while removing the illegal encroachment made by them on the forest lands forming part of the Shoolpaneshwar Wildlife Sanctuary. Such a conduct, prima facie, falls squarely within the ambit of the offence of extortion as contemplated under Sections 383 and 386 of the Indian Penal Code".

The court also emphasized that a "high public office" does not confer any immunity from the operation of law as such office can neither be regarded as an authority to indulge in criminal activities "nor be utilised as a shield" against the legal consequences flowing therefrom. On Vasava's conduct the court said:

"The applicant-accused no.5 Chaitarbhai Damjibhai Vasava is a sitting Member of the Legislative Assembly and represents the law-making institution. Having regard to the offences registered against him and the material indicating that, even after being enlarged on bail subject to an express condition against misuse of the liberty so granted, he openly breached such conditions, more particularly, when he was on probation for a period of two years, granted by the trial court in another offence. Furthermore, he also assaulted individuals and continued to involve himself in further offences for the benefit of his supporters, such conduct, therefore, prima facie, cannot be regarded as befitting the office held by him. In a case where such circumstances exist, an order suspending the sentence and enlarging the accused on bail may create a perception in the society that persons in power are beyond the reach of law and may commit offences without fear of legal consequences. The court cannot remain oblivious to such a consequence.

The exercise of judicial discretion must necessarily be governed by the need to preserve public confidence in the administration of justice and the rule of law. It is well said that “Law is the king of kings, nothing is mightier than law, by whose aid, even the weak may prevail over the strong”. Bearing in mind the aforesaid, the applicant-accused no.5, being a sitting Member of the Legislative Assembly, ought to have guided the aggrieved person to seek lawful remedies".

Instead, the court said, the materials on record prima facie reflected that Vasava resorted to intimidation and coerced government employees into arranging and paying compensation to individuals who had encroached upon forest lands and undertaken unauthorised cultivation. Such conduct of the accused, who is a sitting Member of the Legislative Assembly, raises questions as to the propriety in the context of the public office he holds, the court held.

The court also emphasized that the lands from where the forest officials removed the unauthorised occupation and cultivation was part of the Shoolpaneshwar Wildlife Sanctuary. Thus the accused had "no legal right over such lands" and the action taken by the forest officials was in discharge of their official and lawful duties.

The court however noted that noted that no material or other evidence in connection with the alleged firing was found at the place of the occurrence; thus it could not be prima facie said that there is unimpeachable evidence sufficient to establish the commission of an offence under the Arms Act, the court said. But this does not obliterate the prosecution case on the remaining offences, the court said.

The court further observed that there were 22 offences registered against Chaitarbhai Vasava out of which he was enlarged on bail in 16 cases which required him not to misuse the liberty and not to involve himself in any further offence.

"Notwithstanding such express conditions, the accused appears to have continued to indulge himself into further criminal activities, thereby demonstrating a complete disregard to the orders passed by the trial court and the High Court," the court said.

The court also noted that Vasava was granted probation in another case subject to maintaining a good conduct for a period of two years; however during the subsistence of the very probation period, the Chaitarbhai Damjibhai Vasava, indulged himself into seven further offences, including the present case.

"The fact that the present offence has been committed by the applicant-accused no.5 during the subsistence of the probation period when he is under an express obligation to maintain a good conduct, is a circumstance which cannot be brushed aside while considering the present application...It is further significant to note that, even in the present case, while enlarging the applicant-accused no.5 Chaitarbhai Damjibhai Vasava on bail, a Coordinate Bench of this Court had imposed an express condition that he shall not involve himself into any criminal activity, in future. Notwithstanding such specific conditions, the applicant-accused no.5 has indulged himself into nine other offences even before his conviction in the present case," the court said.

It also observed that ten offences were lodged against Vasava during his tenure as a MLA. During the pendency of the trial in the present case, three offences were registered Vasava. In one of the cases, the court noted that Vasava is claimed to have slapped the complainant therein resulted in a "perforated eardrum".

The court said that the conduct of the applicant-accused no.5 Chaitarbhai Vasava, prima facie, reflects his disregard for law and the orders passed by the competent courts. It further prima facie indicates "his tendency to respond to opposition or criticism with physical assault and violence" thereby creating an "atmosphere of fear".

"Such conduct, when viewed against the backdrop of the evidence on record, is not befitting a sitting Member of the Legislative Assembly who represents a law-making institution. Thus, upon a conjoint reading of the entire material placed on record and the impugned judgment of the trial court, this Court finds that the evidence against the applicants-accused nos.1 and 5 with regard to the alleged violation of the provisions of the Arms Act, at this stage, on a prima facie scrutiny, may not be sufficient, but the material on record prima facie establishes their involvement in the other offences" the court held.

The court refused to suspend sentence of Chaitarbhai Vasava and Jitendrabhai Vasava; it however suspended the sentence of Rikeshbhai Fulsingbhai Vasava subject to certain conditions. The application was dismissed.

Case title: CHAITARBHAI DAMJIBHAI VASAVA v/s STATE OF GUJARAT

CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR SUSPENSION OF SENTENCE) NO. 1 of 2026 In R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1751 of 2026

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 230

Click Here To Read/Download Order