Bombay HC Rejects Plea Against Amit Shah's Discharge In Sohrabuddin Encounter Case; Says May Have Been Filed By “Political Adversary”
The Bombay High Court, while upholding the acquittal of 22 policemen from the alleged fake encounter case of Sohrabuddin Shaikh, his wife Kausar Bi and associate Tulasiram Prajapati, also dismissed an interim application which sought to challenge the discharge of Union Home Minister and BJP leader Amit Shah from the said case. A division bench of Chief Justice Shree Chandrashekhar and...
The Bombay High Court, while upholding the acquittal of 22 policemen from the alleged fake encounter case of Sohrabuddin Shaikh, his wife Kausar Bi and associate Tulasiram Prajapati, also dismissed an interim application which sought to challenge the discharge of Union Home Minister and BJP leader Amit Shah from the said case.
A division bench of Chief Justice Shree Chandrashekhar and Justice Gautam Ankhad, while dismissing the interim application filed by one Maniar Kalpesh Kumar, held that the same might have been filed at the behest of some of Shah's 'political opponent.'
"We have, no hesitation to observe that Interim Application No.1172 of 2026 has been filed with an oblique motive and at the instance of some political adversary of A-16 (Amit Shah)," the order authored by CJ Chandrashekhar, reads.
In its 50-page judgment, the bench took note of the fact that Kumar had filed an interim application when the acquittal appeals were under consideration. Through this interim application, Kumar sought to challenge the order passed by a special court on December 30, 2014, by which it discharged Amit Shah.
However, the CBI, through Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Anil Singh, opposed the said application on the ground that the Rubabuddin Shaikh, brother of Sohrabuddin, had already challenged the said discharge order of Shah and that his plea was dismissed by the High Court on November 23, 2015. The ASG further pointed out that one Harsh Mander, a resident of New Delhi, too had challenged Shah's discharge order, which too was also dismissed by the High Court on March 11, 2016.
"These materials are suppressed by Kumar who is aged about 53 years, engaged in business and a resident of Goregaon (East), Mumbai. The applicant does not state how he gathered information about the judgment in these cases having been reserved. The applicant is not a witness in the said crime, which was re-registered by the CBI. He does not indicate how he is concerned with the pending Criminal Acquittal Appeals and why he has surfaced about two decades after the crime was registered," the judges observed in the order.
With these observations, the bench dismissed the interim application.
Case Title: Rubabuddin Shaikh vs Central Bureau of Investigation (Criminal Appeal 641 of 2019)