Gujarat Riots- Zakia Jafri's Plea Against Clean Chit To Narendra Modi-LIVE UPDATES
Supreme Court to continue hearing today the petition filed by Zakia Jafri challenging the SIT's clean chit to the then Gujarat CM Narendra Modi & other high functionaries in the #GujaratRiots of 2002.A Bench comprising Justices AM Khanwilkar, Dinesh Maheswari and CT Ravikumar will hear the matter today. Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, on behalf of Zakia Jafri, will conclude his...
Supreme Court to continue hearing today the petition filed by Zakia Jafri challenging the SIT's clean chit to the then Gujarat CM Narendra Modi & other high functionaries in the #GujaratRiots of 2002.
A Bench comprising Justices AM Khanwilkar, Dinesh Maheswari and CT Ravikumar will hear the matter today.
Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, on behalf of Zakia Jafri, will conclude his rejoinder arguments today. Later, Mukul Rohatgi will surrejoin.
On Wednesday, apart from contending lack of investigation and questioning the conduct of SIT in the particular matter, Mr. Sibal also argued on the bonafides of Petitioner No. 2 (Teesta Setalvad), against whom he submitted the State and SIT had engaged in a lengthy 'diatribe'. Reiterating his submission for the sake of clarity, he argued that upon diligent investigation of the Tehelka tapes, material with respect to other people would have surfaced, which ultimately could have been perused, to establish a larger conspiracy. Countering Mr. Rohatgi's submissions commending the SIT for an impeccable investigation, Mr. Sibal iterated that in fact, it was the inadequacies in the investigation that has affected the case of larger conspiracy alleged by the Petitioner against the highest State functionaries in the Gujarat riots of 2002.
Stay On This Page For Live Updates From The Hearing.
Both sides conclude their arguments. Notes and other documents to be submitted in a weeks’ time.
Rohatgi: Your lordship wanted the translated version of relevant portion of the Trial Court .Your lordship has been kind and patient in hearing this case at such length. What TC and HC has done your lordship should endorse it.
Rohatgi: The idea is to keep the pot boiling for ulterior purposes of Petitioner no. 2.
Rohatgi: If everything starts again what will happen to the trials that have been concluded. The procedure adopted by SC was 142 procedure so that nobody can say that the SC did not listen to the voice of a aggrieved widow.
Rohatgi: No body has raised finger against us. It is Petitioner 2 who is driving this petition now. Ample opportunity was with you (Petitioner) to say something. To now start a fresh investigation. No material available on ground, convictions have taken place.
Rohatgi: So at the end of the day where do we stand. The SC stay trial, vacated in 2009. Told SIT to take up the 9 cases for further investigation in 2008. We did our job. We were commended by SC.
Rohatgi: This is all that I wanted to say. I am handing over a note, in it I have given a crisp chart of how arguments kept on expanding in protest, HC.
Rohtagi: Now, Haresh Bhatt. He was then an MLA. He was not added as accused either in complaint or in protest. But a grievance is made about him. Even in protest they have not named most of the people stung in operation.
Rohatgi: Amicus has also not mentioned anything about the sting in his report.
Rohatgi:The point that I am making is this that the nature of investigation and report done between 2009-2011 qua this complaint, not a single overmen made in the hearing before SC that SIT had done a slipshod, or siding with accused or done something wrong.