Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, during his official visit to the United Kingdom, personally met Indian High Commissioner P. Kumaran in London and secured protection for the family of retired Bombay High Court Judge Justice Gautam S. Patel, following a sustained campaign of threats against the judge and his family over a judgment he delivered in the Dawoodi Bohra community succession dispute, and a physical attack on his daughter Aditi Patel on the streets of London. The Hertfordshire Constabulary has since provided security and protection to the family.
The Bombay High Court on June 15, 2026 recorded its appreciation for the Chief Justice’s intervention, with a bench of Acting Chief Justice Ravindra Ghuge and Justice Gautam Ankhad hearing the PIL filed by the Bombay Bar Association and other advocates’ bodies in Bombay Bar Association & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors. The Court sought detailed status reports from the Maharashtra Police and the Union Government, and observed that the judiciary and the legal community were “fortunate to have such a CJI.”
Background - The Judgment And The Threats
Justice Gautam Patel, while serving as a Judge of the Bombay High Court, delivered a judgment on April 23, 2024 holding that Syedna Mufaddal Saifuddin was the rightful successor and 53rd Dai al-Mutlaq, the spiritual head of the Dawoodi Bohra community. The judgment has been appealed and a division bench of the Bombay High Court is currently hearing the appeal.
In the approximately ten months since the judgment, Justice Patel and his family have been subjected to a sustained campaign of intimidation. His wife received threat letters in Mumbai, while his daughter Aditi Patel, who resides in London, received similar threatening communications there. The threats demanded that Justice Patel “recant” his judgment by releasing a video on YouTube, failing which dire consequences were threatened for the family. The situation escalated when Aditi Patel was physically attacked by a masked man on the streets of London.
CJI’s Intervention In London
During his official visit to the United Kingdom, Chief Justice of India Surya Kant met Indian High Commissioner P. Kumaran in London and personally asked him to ensure the safety of Justice Patel’s daughter and her family. Reliable sources from the Bombay High Court Administration confirmed the nature and outcome of this meeting:
“After CJI Kant’s intervention, the High Commission provided him with the status of the case pertaining to the threats received by his family members and also the assault on his daughter Aditi Patel. As assured by the High Commission, with their intervention, now the family has been given proper security and protection by the Hertfordshire Constabulary.”
Following the CJI’s intervention, the Indian High Commission engaged with the UK authorities and the Hertfordshire Constabulary has since been providing security and protection to the family. The Director General of Police of Maharashtra and the Commissioner of Police, Mumbai have separately briefed Acting Chief Justice Ravindra Ghuge of the Bombay High Court about the incident and the earlier non-cognisable complaint registered in connection with the threats received by Justice Patel’s family in Mumbai.
PIL Before The Bombay High Court
The Bombay Bar Association (BBA), along with the Advocates Association of Western India (AAWI) and the Bombay Incorporated Law Society (BILS), has filed a PIL before the Bombay High Court seeking urgent directions for the protection of Justice Patel and his family. The PIL characterises the threats and the attack as a direct assault on the independence of the judiciary:
“These attacks and the threats are a direct attack on the independence of the judiciary and may also be aimed as a threat to the judges hearing the appeal against the ruling in question thereby interfering with the administration of justice.”
The PIL notes that an appeal against Justice Patel’s April 2024 ruling is currently pending before a division bench of the Bombay High Court, and that the demands in the threatening letters, to release a video recanting the ruling, appear designed to coerce not only the retired judge but also the judges currently hearing the appeal. The PIL states:
“Judges regularly preside over cases involving dangerous criminals, terrorists and influential political figures. Adequate security prevents retaliation or coercion, ensuring that rulings are based solely on law and facts… the demands in the threatening letters issued to Justice Patel and his family members appear to be a coercive tactic to browbeat or threaten even the judges hearing the appeal in the matter.”
The PIL seeks constitution of a Special Investigation Team (SIT) comprising officers from the Maharashtra Police, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and the National Investigation Agency (NIA). It also seeks appropriate protection measures for Justice Patel and his family. The PIL was mentioned before the Division Bench of Acting Chief Justice Ravindra Ghuge and Justice Gautam Ankhad, which agreed to hear it and directed that it be listed in due course.
Bombay Bar Association’s Condemnation
On June 8, 2026, the Bombay Bar Association issued a statement through its President and Senior Advocate Nitin Thakker condemning the incidents in the strongest terms:
“The Association records its strongest condemnation of any attempt to threaten, intimidate, harass, assault or otherwise target a Judge or members of a Judge’s family on account of the discharge of judicial functions. Reports that a member of Justice Patel’s family suffered physical injury in the course of one of these incidents render the matter particularly disturbing and warrant the most serious attention of the authorities.”
Case Details
Case Title: Bombay Bar Association & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.
Court: Bombay High Court
Bench: Acting Chief Justice Ravindra Ghuge and Justice Gautam Ankhad
Date: June 15, 2026
UK Authority Providing Protection: Hertfordshire Constabulary
Indian High Commissioner: P. Kumaran, London
![Husband Can Also Claim Alimony/Maintenance From Wife: Bombay High Court Orders Woman To Pay Alimony To Ex-Husband [Read Order]](/secure/uploads/2022/04/lj_2823_Divorce.jpg)
