New Delhi: Will Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi be investigated in the Gujarat-riots-related Gulbarg society massacre case? Not yet anyway.
The Supreme Court today directed a Gujarat trial court to examine the report of a Special Investigation Team (SIT) and the amicus curae's review of that report and then decide whether a case needs to be registered to investigate Mr Modi's alleged role in the 2002 case. The SIT's report had allegedly said that there was no evidence to prosecute Mr Modi; amicus curae, Raju Ramachandran, had reviewed that report and allegedly differed on several points with the SIT's findings.
The Supreme Court will now stop monitoring the case and both the reports will be sent to the trial court. The Supreme Court will, however, continue monitoring nine other Gujarat-riots-related cases.
About two hours after the Supreme Court announced its decision, Narendra Modi, who had been closeted since morning in meetings with ministers and officials, tweeted "God is great."
In 2008, Zakia Jafri had petitioned the court alleging that Mr Modi and 61 others, including politicians, policemen and bureaucrats, colluded to ensure that those being attacked by mobs during the 2002 Gujarat riots did not receive help. Mrs Jafri's husband Ehsaan Jafri, a former Congress MP, and 69 other residents of Ahmedabad's Gulbarg Society were killed by rioters on February 28, 2002, a day after the Godhra train-burning incident. About 1,200 people were killed in Gujarat in the post-Godhra riots.
The BJP sees the Supreme Court decision as vindication. "This is the due process of law...I can understand the desperation of Modi-baiters and Modi-haters," said BJP spokesperson Prakash Javadekar.(Watch: Not just relief, it is a victory for Modi: BJP)
Petitioner Zakia Jafri said she was disappointed, that she had "no faith in Gujarat courts", but activist Teesta Setalvad said she saw it as a step forward. "We have full faith in the judicial system, we hope for the best," she said. (Watch: Upset over Supreme Court judgement: Zakia Jafri) | (Watch: Supreme Court order not a clean chit to Modi: Teesta)
Both Setalvad and the Congress emphatically pointed out that this was "not a clean chit to Modi." Congress leader Rashid Alvi said, "Modi's image is still blotted."
Reacting to the Supreme Court verdict, SIT chief R K Raghavan said, "Can't comment on whether Modi has been given a breather. We will cooperate with the trial court." (Watch: SIT will do its best, says RK Raghavan)
On the morning of February 28, 2002, a mob gathered outside Gulbarg Society shouting slogans and began to attack residents. Ehsaan Jafri, who lived in the society, tried to shelter neighbours. Witnesses, including his wife Zakia, have testified in court that the former Congress MP repeatedly called Chief Minister Narendra Modi for help. They also claim that Mr Modi refused to help, and allegedly abused Ehsaan Jafri on the phone. The witnesses say Jafri telephoned many other people, including cops and bureaucrats, for help. To no avail. Sometime later, a mob broke into the ex-MP's house and set him on fire in front of his family. In all, rioters killed 70 people at Gulbarg society.
Zakia Jafri, who still says that "If I wake up, I can't go back to sleep," is not only a witness in the case, but also a woman who has waged a nine-year-long battle for justice. She wants the Chief Minister to be made an accused, along with other powerful people, alleging that there is overwhelming evidence of the direct involvement of the Gujarat government, led by Chief Minister Narendra Modi, in the post-Godhra violence. She has also alleged that Mr Modi told officials at a crucial law and order meeting on February 27, 2002 - the day a coach of the Sabarmati Express carrying kar sevaks was set afire in Godhra - to go slow on rioters. The petition alleges that the Chief Minister positioned senior ministers and party functionaries at selected police control rooms to monitor riots and ensure police inaction. Ms Jafri also claims that phone calls were made from the chief minister's office to police officials and riot accused.
Ms Jafri moved the Supreme Cour after the Gujarat High Court rejected her plea.
On April 27, 2009, the Supreme Court asked a Special Investigation Team that it set up to "look into" Zakia Jafri's complaint. That team submitted its confidential report to the court in May 2010, reportedly saying that that there was no prosecutable evidence against Mr Modi.
In May this year, the Supreme Court asked senior advocate and amicus curae Raju Ramachandran to conduct extensive analysis and review of the evidence gathered by the SIT. Mr Ramachandran submitted his report in July - the report was kept confidential too, but he reportedly fund several lapses in the SIT report.
Among those who Mr Ramachandran reportedly met during his inquiry was senior police officer Sanjiv Bhatt, who has claimed that he attended a meeting called by Mr Modi just as the riots were erupting. Mr Bhatt claims that Mr Modi asked police officers to ignore the riots. He also claims that Mr Modi said minorities were going to be taught a lesson.
Mr Bhatt claims that at the meeting with a group of about eight police officers on February 27, 2002, Mr Modi "further impressed upon the gathering that for too long the Gujarat police had been following the principle of balancing the actions against Hindus and Muslims while dealing with communal riots in Gujarat. This time the situation warranted that 'the Muslims be taught a lesson to ensure that such incidents do not recur ever again.' He claimed that the Chief Minister had expressed the view that the emotions were running very high amongst the Hindus and it was imperative that they be allowed to 'vent out their anger'."
On July 28 this year, the Supreme Court bench of Justice DK Jain, Justice P Sathasivam and Justice Aftab Alam had reserved order, saying it would pass necessary directions for the future course of investigation.
The Supreme Court today directed a Gujarat trial court to examine the report of a Special Investigation Team (SIT) and the amicus curae's review of that report and then decide whether a case needs to be registered to investigate Mr Modi's alleged role in the 2002 case. The SIT's report had allegedly said that there was no evidence to prosecute Mr Modi; amicus curae, Raju Ramachandran, had reviewed that report and allegedly differed on several points with the SIT's findings.
The Supreme Court will now stop monitoring the case and both the reports will be sent to the trial court. The Supreme Court will, however, continue monitoring nine other Gujarat-riots-related cases.
About two hours after the Supreme Court announced its decision, Narendra Modi, who had been closeted since morning in meetings with ministers and officials, tweeted "God is great."
In 2008, Zakia Jafri had petitioned the court alleging that Mr Modi and 61 others, including politicians, policemen and bureaucrats, colluded to ensure that those being attacked by mobs during the 2002 Gujarat riots did not receive help. Mrs Jafri's husband Ehsaan Jafri, a former Congress MP, and 69 other residents of Ahmedabad's Gulbarg Society were killed by rioters on February 28, 2002, a day after the Godhra train-burning incident. About 1,200 people were killed in Gujarat in the post-Godhra riots.
The BJP sees the Supreme Court decision as vindication. "This is the due process of law...I can understand the desperation of Modi-baiters and Modi-haters," said BJP spokesperson Prakash Javadekar.(Watch: Not just relief, it is a victory for Modi: BJP)
Petitioner Zakia Jafri said she was disappointed, that she had "no faith in Gujarat courts", but activist Teesta Setalvad said she saw it as a step forward. "We have full faith in the judicial system, we hope for the best," she said. (Watch: Upset over Supreme Court judgement: Zakia Jafri) | (Watch: Supreme Court order not a clean chit to Modi: Teesta)
Both Setalvad and the Congress emphatically pointed out that this was "not a clean chit to Modi." Congress leader Rashid Alvi said, "Modi's image is still blotted."
Reacting to the Supreme Court verdict, SIT chief R K Raghavan said, "Can't comment on whether Modi has been given a breather. We will cooperate with the trial court." (Watch: SIT will do its best, says RK Raghavan)
On the morning of February 28, 2002, a mob gathered outside Gulbarg Society shouting slogans and began to attack residents. Ehsaan Jafri, who lived in the society, tried to shelter neighbours. Witnesses, including his wife Zakia, have testified in court that the former Congress MP repeatedly called Chief Minister Narendra Modi for help. They also claim that Mr Modi refused to help, and allegedly abused Ehsaan Jafri on the phone. The witnesses say Jafri telephoned many other people, including cops and bureaucrats, for help. To no avail. Sometime later, a mob broke into the ex-MP's house and set him on fire in front of his family. In all, rioters killed 70 people at Gulbarg society.
Zakia Jafri, who still says that "If I wake up, I can't go back to sleep," is not only a witness in the case, but also a woman who has waged a nine-year-long battle for justice. She wants the Chief Minister to be made an accused, along with other powerful people, alleging that there is overwhelming evidence of the direct involvement of the Gujarat government, led by Chief Minister Narendra Modi, in the post-Godhra violence. She has also alleged that Mr Modi told officials at a crucial law and order meeting on February 27, 2002 - the day a coach of the Sabarmati Express carrying kar sevaks was set afire in Godhra - to go slow on rioters. The petition alleges that the Chief Minister positioned senior ministers and party functionaries at selected police control rooms to monitor riots and ensure police inaction. Ms Jafri also claims that phone calls were made from the chief minister's office to police officials and riot accused.
Ms Jafri moved the Supreme Cour after the Gujarat High Court rejected her plea.
On April 27, 2009, the Supreme Court asked a Special Investigation Team that it set up to "look into" Zakia Jafri's complaint. That team submitted its confidential report to the court in May 2010, reportedly saying that that there was no prosecutable evidence against Mr Modi.
In May this year, the Supreme Court asked senior advocate and amicus curae Raju Ramachandran to conduct extensive analysis and review of the evidence gathered by the SIT. Mr Ramachandran submitted his report in July - the report was kept confidential too, but he reportedly fund several lapses in the SIT report.
Among those who Mr Ramachandran reportedly met during his inquiry was senior police officer Sanjiv Bhatt, who has claimed that he attended a meeting called by Mr Modi just as the riots were erupting. Mr Bhatt claims that Mr Modi asked police officers to ignore the riots. He also claims that Mr Modi said minorities were going to be taught a lesson.
Mr Bhatt claims that at the meeting with a group of about eight police officers on February 27, 2002, Mr Modi "further impressed upon the gathering that for too long the Gujarat police had been following the principle of balancing the actions against Hindus and Muslims while dealing with communal riots in Gujarat. This time the situation warranted that 'the Muslims be taught a lesson to ensure that such incidents do not recur ever again.' He claimed that the Chief Minister had expressed the view that the emotions were running very high amongst the Hindus and it was imperative that they be allowed to 'vent out their anger'."
On July 28 this year, the Supreme Court bench of Justice DK Jain, Justice P Sathasivam and Justice Aftab Alam had reserved order, saying it would pass necessary directions for the future course of investigation.
No comments:
Post a Comment