Rajasthan HC rejects habeas corpus plea of ex-minister Mahesh Joshi in Jal Jeevan scam
Rajasthan HC rejects habeas corpus plea of ex-minister Mahesh Joshi

Jaipur: Former Rajasthan minister Mahesh Joshi failed to secure relief from the Rajasthan High Court on Friday, as the court dismissed a habeas corpus petition challenging his arrest in the alleged Jal Jeevan Mission (JJM) scam. A division bench comprising Justice Umashankar Vyas and Justice Ashok Kumar Jain rejected the petition filed by Joshi's son, Rohit Joshi, and stated that a detailed order explaining the reasons for the dismissal would be issued separately.

Petition Grounds

The petition sought Joshi's release on the grounds that mandatory legal procedures were allegedly not followed during his arrest by the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) on May 7. It was contended that family members were not provided written information regarding the grounds of arrest, making the detention illegal. However, the court did not find merit in these arguments.

Prosecution's Response

Opposing the plea, Advocate General Rajendra Prasad argued that a similar challenge had already been considered and rejected by the trial court. He stated, Identical relief could not be sought simultaneously before different forums after the competent court already upheld the arrest. He further added that information regarding the grounds and circumstances of the arrest was conveyed to family members through oral and technological means.

Wide Pickt banner — collaborative shopping lists app for Telegram, phone mockup with grocery list

Arrest and Judicial Custody

Joshi was arrested by the ACB from his residence on May 7 in connection with the alleged multi-crore JJM scam and was subsequently sent to judicial custody on May 11. The High Court's decision comes days after a special court dealing with ACB matters rejected Joshi's plea challenging the legality of his arrest. Special Judge Rajesh Kumar Dadiya dismissed the application on June 9, observing that Joshi's family members were present when he was taken into custody, his son was informed about the arrest, and his counsel represented him during remand proceedings. The trial court accepted the prosecution's contention that all legal requirements were complied with.

Pickt after-article banner — collaborative shopping lists app with family illustration