Gujarat Riots- Zakia Jafri's Plea Against Clean Chit To Narendra Modi-LIVE UPDATES

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

9 Dec 2021 5:11 AM GMT

  • Gujarat Riots- Zakia Jafris 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.

    Live Updates

    • 9 Dec 2021 5:59 AM GMT

      Rohatgi: My submission in this regard was that if the complaint was like this then the petitioner cannot get a hearing under 136 of the Constitution.

    • 9 Dec 2021 5:55 AM GMT

      Rohatgi: The reason was that originally they wanted to treat him as an accused but, now they want to treat him as a witness. SIT found all the three- Shreekumar, Sharma and Sanjeev Bhatt were unreliable.

    • 9 Dec 2021 5:54 AM GMT

      Rohatgi: There is no answer of the doctoring of the complaint. He said that we had told SIT that he will be a witness vis-a-vis an accused. The question is different, it is, why have they(Petitioner) deliberately filed a wrong copy of the complaint in the SC.

    • 9 Dec 2021 5:54 AM GMT

      Rohatgi: They(Petitioner) said we never argued that protest be treated as part of complaint. It was repeatedly argued that you forget about my complaint, when the protest was before the Mag, why did he (Mag) not look at it.

    • 9 Dec 2021 5:50 AM GMT

      Rohatgi: My Ld. Friend also said he did not argue on parading between Godhra to Solah and he now claims that parading means after the bodies were given to the kins. He is now twisting the argument. While his case is that the bodies were paraded from Godhra.

    • 9 Dec 2021 5:46 AM GMT

      Rohatgi: In Mr. Sibal’s note your lordship might correct that, this is Anil Shankarbhai Patel. It (Petitioner) says no statement recorded. We recorded statements of all three. 18 persons were stung by operation, out of that 13 persons’ testimony are in para 30.

    • 9 Dec 2021 5:46 AM GMT

      Rohatgi : There are three Anil Patels, Anil Patel - Doctor, Anil Patel - Minister, Anil Shankarbhai Patel - VHP, stung by Tehelka.

    • 9 Dec 2021 5:45 AM GMT

      Rohatgi: They say Babu Bajrangi was convicted on the basis of tapes. They were at best extra-judicial. He was convicted on the basis of other evidence.

    • 9 Dec 2021 5:45 AM GMT

      Sibal: Very few times in the history of this court ...when majesty of law is being tested. I am not interested in targeting anybody, under criminal law you take cognisance of offences not of offenders. Deeply grateful to your lordships.

    • 9 Dec 2021 5:44 AM GMT

      Sibal: Then he talks about treating protest as complaint. Para 78. This was argued before the Mag. But I have never argued this point. So, that deals with my Ld. Friend’s compilation.

    Next Story