Modi’s Pretense of Justice – Riot Cases to Encounters The UK Prime Minister was reportedly impressed by the “fact” that, ’there have been significant developments in the legal process following the 2002 Gujarat riots,’. Cameron was never known to be literate in Indian affairs and his information regarding the “development in legal process in Gujarat” is indeed very shallow. So far as the cases arising out of the violence of 2002 is concerned, thousands have been closed down by the Gujarat Police and the only few that have resulted in conviction are those cases which were directed by the Supreme Court to be investigated and prosecuted by the Special Investigation team (SIT) formed by the Supreme Court! Even SIT refused to arrest Mayaben Kodnani and Jaydeep Patel till Jan Sangharsh Manch had analysed the Call Data Record of the two accused and produced their locations in the scene of crime before SIT. Thus Modi has no role to play in the development of legal process except obstructing the due process. We shall give just one more shocking illustrations of the travesty of justice at the hands of the Gujarat Government in one of the widely reported cases: Rubabuddin Sheikh, Brother of Sohrabuddin Rubabuddin Sheikh, Brother of Sohrabuddin Demanding Modi’s Arrest on Sep 10th 2013 In the Sohrabuddin-Kauserbi-Tulsiram case, after being directed by the Supreme Court to investigate the triple murder, IGP Geeta Johri of the Gujarat Police was handed over the Investigation. Ms Johri derailed the investigation at the stage when the Minister of State, Amit Shah’s name cropped up as an accused as reported by the I.O. of the case, Shri V L Solanki. Supreme Court noticing the game plan handed over the Investigation to the CBI. The observations of Supreme Court and the subsequent Charge-Sheet by CBI are eye- openers for those who are under the misconception of Modi’s concept of Justice! This extract is taken from Rubabbuddin Sheikh v. State of Gujarat,(2010) 2 SCC 200, at page 217: 69. We have observed that from the record, it was found that Mr V.L. Solanki, an investigating officer, was proceeding in the right direction, but Ms Johri had not been carrying out the investigation in the right manner, in view of our discussions made here in above. It appears that Ms Johri had not made any reference to the second report of Solanki, and that though his first report was attached with one of her reports, the same was not forwarded to this Court. Therefore, we are of the view that her mentioning the criminal background of Sohrabuddin and the discussion among the accused officers concerning Sohrabuddin was meant to obfuscate the enquiry. 81. In the present circumstances and in view of the involvement of the police officials of the State in this crime, we cannot shut our eyes and direct the State police authorities to continue with the investigation and the charge-sheet and for a proper and fair investigation, we also feel that CBI should be requested to take up the investigation and submit a report in this Court within six months from the date of handing over a copy of this judgment and the records relating to this crime to them. Pursuant to the direction of the Supreme Court , CBI conducted further investigation and filed a fresh charge-sheet naming Amit Shah and also Geeta Johri who had derailed the earlier investigation. The extract of the said charge-sheet is given herein below:(RC BS1/2011/S/003-MUM) 6.23 … In pursuance of the criminal conspiracy as aforesaid, accused Amit Shah (A-1) somewhere between 12/12/2006 and 21/12/2006 called a meeting of the then DGP P.C. Pande (A-17), ADGP CID/Crime G C Raigar and the IGP CID Crime Geetha Johri (A-18) in his office and expressed his displeasure about the ongoing enquiry being carried out by V.L. Solanki, and further expressed his annoyance about how an officer of the rank of an Inspector could dare to write a report which could land senior officers like D G Vanzara (A-2) and S. Pandian Rajkumar (A-3) in serious trouble. Accused Amit Shah (A-1) also arranged for co-accused Geetha Johri (A-18) to join the criminal conspiracy by asking her to destroy the enquiry papers submitted by V L Solanki and to manage things to ensure that the interests of the other co-accused senior police officers, namely, D.G. Vanzara (A-2) and S. Pandian Rajkumar (A-3), etc. were protected…In accordance with the conspiratorial instructions of accused Amit Shah (A-1) given in furtherance of the criminal conspiracy as aforesaid to protect the interests of the accused, accused Geeta Johri (A-18), directed V.L. Solanki to make changes in the enquiry papers and to prepare a report towards such end. However, VL Solanki, Inspector of Police declined to obey the illegal directions of accused Geeta Johri (A-18). Would people like David Cameron to update his data bank about the Justice that Modi Government has been dispensing to protect the skin of it’s political leadership. Or is it the simple greed of the East India Company to trade with Gujarat once again after 156 years?
Posted on: Mon, 23 Sep 2013 20:47:25 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015