Gujarat Riots: Zakia Jafri's Plea Against Clean Chit To Narendra Modi- Supreme Court Hearing: LIVE UPDATES
Supreme Court will 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 Maheshwari and CT Ravikumar is hearing the matter.Yesterday, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal has drawn the court's attention towards the issue...
Supreme Court will 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 Maheshwari and CT Ravikumar is hearing the matter.
Yesterday, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal has drawn the court's attention towards the issue of collaboration of the key functionaries of the State with the accused persons, referring to the documents submitted by him along with the Protest Petition. It was his submission that the SIT did not make investigations regarding the collaboration and the allied issues, when there was evidence before it.
During the course of four days until today, Mr. Sibal contended that the Special Investigation Team had neither looked into the reports by the National Human Rights Commission, Election Commission, or the Committee on Empowerment of Women set up by Parliament with respect to the Gujarat riots nor did they examine the members of such commissions. He also demonstrated the flaw in SIT's stand that there was no violence or arson.
SIT has not challenged the Gujarat High Court's decision to acquit Maya Kodnani, former BJP MLA from Naroda, who was identified as the 'kingpin' in the Naroda Patiya massacre of 2002 by the trial court, Mr. Kapil Sibal argued hinting at the political optics of the SIT not challenging the High Court order. Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal told the Supreme Court that the SIT head RK Raghavan was appointed as a High Commissioner later, and all these people who 'collaborated were rehabilitated later.
Stay On This Page For Live Updates From The Hearing
Sibal: Milords, this is another letter to Mr. Narayan.
Bench: We'll continue on Tuesday.
Sibal: I intend to complete it by Tuesday evening.
Sibal: Luckily, we have one evidence of the Police Commissioner himself, which says how ministers were interfering. Who has investigated this? Nobody. Who brought this minister to task? Nobody.
Sibal: Milords he is saying the same thing, Shreekumar supports him and he is disbelieved.
Sibal: SIT says he is a motivated officer. What is motivated about it. This is what Tehelka tape, NHRC, Citizen's Tribunal say. SIT said that he was superseded in 2005 and that is why he gave this statement.
Sibal: Now, another officer, Maniram. He corroborates Shreekumar.
Sibal: [He (Shreekumar) talks about the restoration of faith of the public, especially people belonging to the minority community in the criminal justice system.] He says change the functionaries. That's why he became unpopular. Shreekumar himself handed over all the four letters to SIT.
Sibal: This is one letter he wrote. Then another letter he wrote on 20th August at 187 and the last document was on 28th Aug. Again, this is a secret. The first letter is appendix 24, second is 4, third is 5 and fourth is 7. I'll tell your Lordship the source of all these.
Bench: This is report of private tribunal. This is a secret document. How did they get hold of it?
Sibal: This document is not part of any private record.
Bench: The Report (Citizen's Tribunal) refers to the same facts and reports.
Sibal: All of that is newspaper report.
Sibal: Naturally when the officers were saying that this was happening in police, he was bound to be unpopular. Then milords the prognosis.
Bench: Mr. Sibal. This document is part of Appendix 24 of the Citizen's tribunal report?
Sibal: When an amicus was appointed. It was (most probably) Salve. He gave a list of cases where PPs had not opposed bail.
Sibal: [Shreekumar talks about Police officers not being fair, in registering cases, towards minority communities; accused not named by police, loopholes in prosecution; complaint from Muslim community that police was avoiding arrest of Hindu leaders etc.]