The Honorable Supreme Court has taken the proverbial wind out of sails of the Gujarat riot NGO cottage industry which has been eking out a rather healthy living out of post riot litigation. The full judgment is avaibale here(PDF File).
After the burning of the S-6 bogie of Sabarmati Express and the riots that followed, there has been a continuous effort to nail the CM of Gujarat.
There were plethora of Commissions – Banerjee Commission, Nanavati Mehta Commission (Part 1 released) to look into the various aspects of riots and numerous cases filed in various court cases to punish the culprits.
Teesta Setalavad and her band of followers went to Supreme court on 8 different cases.
Godhra Train Burning Killings
Naroda Patia Massacre
Naroda Gam Massacre
Gulberg Society Massacre
Deepla Darwaza Killings
British National Killings
These cases have been investigated by Gujarat police and were reaching a crucial stage when the SC has been approached. What was asked from SC?
“The appellant had sought for a direction to the Director General of Police, State of Gujarat, to register her private complaint dated 8th June, 2006 as a First Information Report and direct investigation therein by an independent agency”
Please mark the dates. Also another important lie that was always perpetuated – there was no FIR filed on Ehsan jaffri’s death .
“An FIR relating to the incident was registered by the Police with Meghaninagar Police Station, Ahmedabad. After investigation, on the filing of the charge-sheet, the case was committed to the Court of Sessions, Ahmedabad”
Please note that investigations has occurred and a chargesheet filed!
Naturally, the writ petition on the private complaint filed by the Late Ehsan jafri’s wife Zakia Jaffri in Gujarat HC was dismissed with the following observation –
“If the appellant had got certain additional material against some persons accused in her complaint, it was open to her to approach the investigating agency, requesting further investigation, or, alternatively she could herself approach the Court concerned for further investigation in terms of Section 173(8) of the Code.”
Note the word – additional material against some persons accused – chief of them – Chief Minister Narendra Modi and 62 others acting in Criminal conspiracy.
After this judgement by the Gujarat Hight Court an appeal was made to the Supreme Court:
“It was the case of the appellant that subsequently she received certain material which showed that the incidents which took place during the period between 27th February, 2002 and 10th May, 2002, were aided, abetted and conspired by some responsible persons in power, in connivance with the State Administration,including the Police
The appellant thus sought registration of another FIR against certain persons named in the complaint, dated 8th June, 2006, for offences punishable under Section 302 read with Section 120B as also under Section 193 read with Sections 114, 186 & 153A, 186, 187 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
However, as the police declined to take cognizance of her complaint, the appellant filed the aforementioned petition before the High Court. Having failed to convince the High Court that it was a fit case for investigation by an independent agency, the appellant-complainant, supported by an NGO, is before us in this appeal”
Zakia wanted the Gujarat CM and 62 others to be named in the FIR. She also prayed that an independent agency take over the investigations.The court agreed and thus the SIT was constituted on 26th March 2008. In this judgment on May 1st 2009 SC ordered all trials to happen under SIT. We can see the various hearings that happened in Supreme Court and judgments given here.
Briefly this is what has happened
“On 3rd March, 2008 while issuing notice to the Union of India and State of Gujarat, an Amicus Curiae was appointed to assist the Court. Vide order dated 27th April, 2009, the Special Investigation Team (for short “the SIT”), which had been constituted vide order dated 26th March, 2008 to carry out further investigations in nine cases, subject matter of Writ Petition No. 109 of 2003, was directed ‘to look into’, the complaint submitted by the appellant on 8th June, 2006 to the Director General of Police, Gujarat. Pursuant to the said direction Shri A.K. Malhotra, former D.I.G. (C.B.I.) and one of the members of the SIT, examined a number of witnesses and looked into a large number of documents made available to him.
A report, dated 12th May, 2010, was submitted to this Court by the Chairman, SIT, concurring with the findings of Shri A.K. Malhotra. – Shri A.K. Malhotra, inter alia recommended further investigation under Section 173(8) of the Code against certain Police officials and a Minister in the State Cabinet. Consequently, further investigation was conducted and a report dated 17th November, 2010, was submitted by the SIT.
On23rd November, 2010, Shri Raju Ramachandran, Senior Advocate and Shri Gaurav Agarwal, Advocate, replaced the previous Amicus Curiae, who had expressed his unwillingness to continue.”
Note – Again SIT conducted another investigation.
On 20th January, 2011, a preliminary note was submitted by Shri Raju Ramachandran, the learned Amicus Curiae; whereon, vide order dated 15th March, 2011, the SIT was directed to submit its report,and if necessary carry out further investigation in light of the observations made in the said note. The SIT conducted further investigation under Section 173(8) of the Code in Meghaninagar Police Station Crime Report No.67 of 2002—Gulberg Society case,
and submitted a report on 24th April, 2011. After examining the said report, on 5th May, 2011, the following order was passed :
“Pursuant to our order dated 15th March, 2011, the Chairman, Special Investigation Team (SIT) has filed report on the further investigations carried out by his team along with his remarks thereon. Statements of witnesses as also the documents have been placed on record in separate volumes. Let a copy of all these documents along with the report of the Chairman be supplied to Mr. Raju Ramachandran, the learned Amicus Curiae. The learned Amicus Curiae shall examine the report; analyze and have his own independent assessment of the statements of the witnesses recorded by the SIT and submit his comments thereon. It will be open to the learned Amicus Curiae to interact with any of the witnesses, who have been examined by the SIT, including the police officers, as he may deem fit. If the learned Amicus Curiae forms an opinion that on the basis of the material on record, any offence is made out against any person, he shall mention the same in his report.”
Note – Further Investigations by SIT and another Investigation by Amicus Curae
The learned Amicus Curiae has now submitted his final report dated 25th July, 2011. In light of the above conspectus and the report of the learned Amicus Curiae, the question for determination is the future course of action in the matter.
The Court’s judgment quotes that – “ question arose as to whether after the submission of the final report by the CBI in the Court of Special Judge, pursuant to this Court’s directions, this Court should examine the legality and validity of CBI’s action in seeking a sanction under Section 197 of the Code for the prosecution of some of the persons named in the final report. Dismissing the application moved by the learned Amicus Curiae seeking directions in this behalf”
Note the words – Supreme Court dismissed the application for prosecution of the persons named and left it to Trial court whether to accept addition or not.
Now go back and see what the petitioner wanted –
- There was a criminal conspiracy with CM and 62 others
- There has to be an independent investigation
- FIR to be filed against those named
Supreme Court allowed the 2nd one to happen and said no orders on filing FIR which they wanted that makes the entire case gone.
A death is a death. Zakia Jaffri’s case should be taken to logical conclusion. There was already an FIR filed and trial was in progress from 2006. What happened was that she was sucked into by NGOs like CJP and others trying to bring in Modi by going to SC and obstructing the natural course of law.
Don’t Blame Modi for delay in judgment. The blame should lie with the NGOs who egged on victims. FIR was filed, Trial case on from 2006. 8 Cases were taken to Supreme court for Independent Investigation and an additional FIR to be filed from 2008 – 2011. The NGOs led by Teesta went for a maximalist position to box in Modi for the lies that they have been perpetrating for 9 long years.
The Supreme court in its judgements yesterday has dealt a crippling blow to the Anti – Modi cottage industry and it is time to bring shutters down on them. I hope that the trial court looks into the case and awards punishment to perpetrators as mentioned in SIT report and bring this and many other cases to closure.
Centreofright is a friend of CRI. He tweets as @centerofright
Latest posts by centerofright (see all)
- Rules of Indian Sicu-Liber Farm - October 18, 2011
- Anti – Modi – Cottage Industry – Time to down Shutters? - September 13, 2011
- Godhra Verdict: Explaining the delay - February 23, 2011