Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for the SIT, argued in the apex court that allegations of a larger conspiracy during the riots were being “motivated” by Teesta Setalvad.
Arguing on Zakia Jafri’s plea relating to the 2002 riots, the state government told the Supreme Court on Thursday that there is a bigger conspiracy by social activist Teesta Setalvad to defame Gujarat for nearly two decades.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for Gujarat, told a bench headed by Justice AM Khanwilkar that he has nothing to say against Zakia Jafri as she has lost her loved ones, but to “exploit” one’s sorrows. should have a limit. Widow.
Zakia Jafri, wife of Congress leader Ehsan Jafri, who was killed during the violence at Gulberg Society in Ahmedabad on February 28, 2002, has challenged the SIT’s clean chit to 64 people, including the then Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi, during the riots. ,
Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for the Special Investigation Team (SIT), argued in the apex court that allegations of a larger conspiracy during the riots were being “motivated” by Setalvad, petitioner number two in the petition filed by Zakia Jafri. . in the top court.
“My honorable submission is that for almost 20 years a huge conspiracy has been hatched by petitioner number two (Teesta Setalvad) to defame an entire state,” Mehta told the bench, also comprising Justice Dinesh Maheshwari and Justice CT Ravikumar. Are included.
“I have nothing against petitioner number one (Zakia Jafri), he is injured, he has lost his loved ones. I have nothing to say against him. But, and I am choosing my words very carefully, there must be a limit to exploiting the miseries of the widow,” he said.
Mehta told the bench that the SIT had from time to time filed status reports before the top court and, at last, was “at pain” to point out that Setalvad was “teaching witnesses, computerized pre-typed was preparing the statements and sending them”.
“And it has been my complaint from the very beginning that why the SIT did not prosecute him for fabricating false evidence. This is nothing but fabricating false evidence,” he said during the arguments, which will continue on December 7. Mehta said it was nothing but the creation of evidence to inculcate “innocent persons” in the crime.
“What is the reason, what is the reason, what is the motivation, what is that big conspiracy that still forces them to boil the pot,” he said. Mehta also referred to a Gujarat High Court order passed in a separate case alleging misuse of funds received by Setalvad’s NGOs for 2002 riot victims.
Rohatgi argued that a “silent” end should be given to all this as there is nothing to substantiate the allegations of larger conspiracy during the riots and the SIT took a deep dive on the complaint filed by Zakia Jafri in 2006. was examined. He said that allowing Zakia Jafri’s petition would cause great injustice as there was no error in the orders passed by the courts below.
“I submit that this is being conducted by petitioner number two (Setalvad) only. It is not being conducted by this woman and it is clear from her statement that she said what petitioner two told her,” Rohatgi said. He mentioned the sequence and said that the riots took place in 2002 while Zakia Jafri filed a complaint in 2006 alleging a bigger conspiracy.
The bench said that in criminal justice, the accused also has the right to a fair trial and finalize the proceedings. “No one who is accused of an offense should be acquitted without a fair trial. At the same time, the accused has the right to a fair trial and finalization of proceedings.”
Zakia Jafri’s lawyer had previously argued that her 2006 complaint was “a larger conspiracy where bureaucratic inaction, police complicity, hate speech and violence were perpetrated.” Former MP Ehsan Jafri was among the 68 people who were murdered. The violence took place a day after the Godhra train incident.
The S-6 coach of the Sabarmati Express was torched in Godhra, in which 59 people died in 2002 and riots broke out in Gujarat. On February 8, 2012, the SIT filed a closure report giving clean chit to Modi, now the Prime Minister and 63. Others, including senior government officials, said there was “no prosecutable evidence” against him.
Zakia Jafri had filed a petition in the apex court in 2018 challenging the Gujarat High Court’s October 5, 2017 order dismissing her plea against the SIT’s decision. The petition also said that after the SIT had given a clean chit in its closure report before a trial judge, Zakia Jafri filed a protest petition, which was dismissed by the magistrate without considering the “certified merits”.
The High Court, in its October 2017 order, had said that the SIT probe is supervised by the Supreme Court. However, it partly allowed his petition, so far as the demand for further inquiry was concerned, stating that he may seek further inquiry from a Magistrate’s Court, a Division Bench of the High Court, or an appropriate forum including the Supreme Court. can demand.
,