sit: Allegation of bigger plot in disproportionate 2002 riots: SIT tells Supreme Court

[ad_1]

The Special Investigative Team (SIT) told the Supreme Court on Thursday that the allegation of a larger plot in the Gujarat riots of 2002 was “exaggerated” by claiming that several people in the government of the The state of the time, from the highest to the highest to the lowest, were “accomplices”. The SIT told a tribunal led by Judge AM Khanwilkar that they had examined everyone from the chief minister of Gujarat to others, and spent a lot of time on all the issues raised in the complaint filed by Zakia Jafri who alleged a larger conspiracy. during the riots.

Zakia Jafri, the wife of assassinated Congress leader Ehsan Jafri who was killed at the Gulberg company in Ahmedabad on February 28, 2002, during the violence, challenged the SIT’s clear word to 64 people, including Narendra Modi, then minister. chief of Gujarat during the riots.

“What I’m trying to make is that it’s overkill, totally over the top in saying that everyone in state government, from the highest to the lowest, everyone in the political class, everyone in the state administration, everyone in the police is an accomplice, “SIT representative Mukul Rohatgi told the judiciary.

Rohatgi told the judiciary, also including Justices Dinesh Maheshwari and CT Ravikumar, that there had been allegations of egregious examples of “state-sponsored events.”

“See the impact of this. That’s why I said this case had escalated, ”he said, adding,“ What do you mean by state sponsored? Does this mean that members of the administration, the political class sponsored these riots? “.

Arguing that there was nothing to support the allegation of a larger conspiracy, he said the SIT investigated all aspects, reviewed the relevant documents, and then filed a report with the trial court.

“The SIT examined everyone from the Chief Minister down to the bottom, key cabinet members including the Chief Minister, senior police officials, senior civil administration officials …. all of this has been done. It’s not like they (SIT) haven’t. question the chief minister or anyone else, “he said during the debates that would continue on December 1.

Senior counsel said the allegation that there had been an undue delay in the deployment of the military during the violence in the state was not justified.

He said the military was called in on the same day and deployed, which destroyed allegations of conspiracy, whether by the political class, the state government or the police.

“Why didn’t the government do this, why the government didn’t transfer this, this is not supposed to be crime or conspiracy. But yet this SIT has spent a lot time to all these questions. They left no problem, saying that it is beyond our remit, “he said.

During the hearing, the judiciary asked Rohatgi whether the applicant had participated in the trial which was taking place before the court of first instance.

He said Zakia Jafri was questioned as a prosecution witness during the trial.

The court told Rohatgi that if his testimony is available, it can be recorded.

The lead lawyer also told the judiciary that 19 of the 275 people interviewed by the SIT were prosecution witnesses in the Gulberg case.

Rohatgi told the judiciary that during the proceedings in the Supreme Court, Zakia Jafri did not press the issue of the complaint against the then chief minister.

The judiciary questioned senior lawyer Kapil Sibal, who represents Zakia Jafri, about this.

“All matters which need further investigation, I have read to your lordships,” said Sibal, adding: “I did not deliberately read any part of the allegation against the then CM.”

He said the petitioner was not asking for any further investigation into the February 27 meeting.

Rohatgi said the court may note that the allegation against the then chief minister in the lawsuit or what was recorded in the closing report and accepted by the lower court is not challenged.

To this, Sibal said: “There is no rush for further investigation.”

“Tomorrow, if there is more evidence that comes up, I don’t know, I have no idea. It is the law of this land that if tomorrow another new evidence comes along that is not. not available today, nothing is ever closed See what happened to the Sikh riots, ”Sibal said.

Sibal said he would make a written statement on behalf of the petitioner on this matter.

Zakia Jafri’s lawyer had previously argued that his 2006 complaint was that there was “a larger conspiracy where there was bureaucratic inaction, police complicity, hate speech and the outbreak of violence “.

Ehsan Jafri, the former MP, was among 68 people killed in the violence a day after the Godhra train incident.

On February 8, 2012, the SIT had filed a closing report giving a clear opinion to Modi, now prime minister, and 63 others, including senior government officials, saying there was “no likely evidence. of prosecution “against them.

Zakia Jafri had filed a petition before the Supreme Court in 2018 challenging the order of the High Court of Gujarat of October 5, 2017 rejecting his plea against the decision of the SIT.

In its October 2017 order, the High Court declared that the SIT investigation was overseen by the Supreme Court.

However, he partially allowed her request regarding her request for further investigation, saying that she can apply to an appropriate forum, including the district court, a division chamber of the high court or the Supreme Court to request a further investigation.

[ad_2]