Probe larger conspiracy says Zakia Jafri's counsel, reminds SIT of Supreme Court order regarding 2002 riots

Since the Supreme Court started supervising the Best Bakery case, it had clearly told the investigating agency to probe the larger conspiracy behind the riots, said Zakia Jafri’s advocate Sanjay Parikh. He was commencing argument during the hearing of Jafri’s protest petition against the closure report of the Supreme Court-appointed Special Investigation Team (SIT) on Wednesday. 

Parikh strongly condemned the SIT’s argument that though the latter had been told by the SC to investigate only the Gulbarg housing society massacre, it had investigated other riot-related cases in addition and without compulsion. 

Citing the SC order, he said the apex court had clearly told the SIT to look into the nine cases of riots in Gujarat. Parikh further stated that when Jafri filed her petition on June 8, 2006, the SC had passed an order, categorically telling the SIT that it would also have to probe allegations against chief minister Narendra Modi and 61 others in addition to the nine trials it was already investigating. Parikh argued for around two hours before magistrate B J Ganatra and discussed the SC orders as well.

The SIT had earlier opposed Jafri’s protest petition filed by her against the closure report of the SIT. She had filed the protest petition in the Ahmedabad Metropolitan court on April 15, 2013, challenging the SIT’s clean chit to Modi and 61 others on their alleged role in the Gulbarg society riot case. Parikh argued that according to orders passed by the SC, the SIT shall investigate Jafri’s complaint instead of restricting the probe to the Gulbarg massacre only. SIT counsel R S Jamuar had earlier told the court that the petition was nothing but a piece of wastepaper. Claiming that it was drafted by a few people, Jafri had no knowledge of its contents and that the entire petition was nothing but full of charges cooked up against the CM, Jamuar had told the court.

See also: Police records show Gujarat riots weren’t a sudden backlash
Is there a systematic attempt to withhold crucial evidence from the gaze of the courts? As in the Tytler case (1984) where the investigating agency did its best to discredit witnesses, so in this one, it seems that the criminal justice system sometimes works actively for the benefit  of powerful accused persons. In February 2013 the SC allowed Ms Jafri to file a fresh protest petition and directed that she be supplied with entire SIT report to enable her to file the protest petition. Ms Jafri, widow of Eshan Jafri..  had approached the Supreme Court challenging the magistrate's order. In her petition, Ms Jafri asked for documents related to the investigation, including an interim report by SIT member A K Malhotra. Following the Supreme Court's orders, the SIT had supplied the copy of the Malhotra report to Ms Jafri and Metropolitan Magistrate B J Ganatra gave her time to file protest petition by April 15.  This shows that the SIT had not supplied the requisite documents to Ms Jafri, and did so only after being ordered to do so by the SC.  

Full Text of Mrs. Zakia Jafri's Protest Petition

Gujarat Genocide: The State, Law And Subversion

Did Narendra Modi, Amit Shah know of the Ishrat Jahan encounter in advance?

ex-DGP Sreekumar writes open letter to Modi

'Modi-phobia' has gripped Gujarat police: Ex-DGP R B Sreekumar

Ishrat Jehan's mother appeals for justice // CBI Probe Nails IB Officer’s Role
1984 carnage - 5 convicted, main accused Sajjan Kumar acquitted


Popular posts from this blog

Third degree torture used on Maruti workers: Rights body

Haruki Murakami: On seeing the 100% perfect girl one beautiful April morning

The Almond Trees by Albert Camus (1940)

Albert Camus's lecture 'The Human Crisis', New York, March 1946. 'No cause justifies the murder of innocents'

Goodbye Sadiq al-Azm, lone Syrian Marxist against the Assad regime

Rudyard Kipling: critical essay by George Orwell (1942)

Satyagraha - An answer to modern nihilism