News Analysis India

Tag: Ehsan Jafri

  • Violence in 2002 Gujarat riots perpetrated through design: Zakia Jafri tells SC

    By PTI

    NEW DELHI: The violence in the 2002 Gujarat riots was perpetrated through a “design” which emanates from the documents, Zakia Jafri Tuesday told the Supreme Court while arguing that the Republic is like a ship that will only be steady if the “majesty of the law prevails”.

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

    Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Zakia Jafri who has alleged larger conspiracy during the riots, told a bench headed by Justice A M Khanwilkar that this is a case where the majesty of the law has been “deeply injured”.

    Terming the 2002 incidents of Godhra and subsequent riots as a “national tragedy of gargantuan proportions”, Sibal said the petitioner is concerned with how the majesty of the law will deal with such issues when men “behave like animals”.

    “These are not matters of an individual case of murder or violence committed. It is violence which was perpetrated through design and the design emanates from the documents,” he told the bench, also comprising Justices Dinesh Maheshwari and C T Ravikumar while referring to the materials placed by Jafri.

    Sibal said that these documents were part of the official record and the SIT had not investigated these aspects.

    He said the petitioner is neither concerned with individuals nor pointing a finger or wish to prosecute A or B.

    “The issue is much larger than the issue of prosecuting individuals. It deals with the polity of this country. It deals with the manner in which institutions are to act in a national emergency. This was a national emergency. What happened in Sabarmati (train) resulted in a national emergency,” Sibal said.

    The S-6 coach of Sabarmati Express was burnt at Godhra, killing 59 people and triggering riots in Gujarat in 2002.

    During the arguments, the senior advocate said what happened after the Sabarmati Express incident was equally a national tragedy.

    “I am concerned with how the majesty of the law will deal with such issues when men behave like animals,” he said, adding, “Therefore, ultimately, I am looking at my own Constitution and saying to myself, can this be allowed under the rule of law in our system. And if it is going to be allowed, then who is going to protect us.”

    Sibal said the Special Investigation Team (SIT) had not probed several aspects and materials which were available on the record and the trial court had also not examined them.

    He said one can seldom have direct evidence of conspiracy and it is based on circumstantial evidence which will come up only if there is an investigation.

    “If you don’t investigate, you will never find out the circumstances and you will never discover the conspiracy,” he said.

    Referring to the materials available on the record, he said it prima facie showed that there was a conspiracy but who all were involved in this would be known only if there is an investigation on all the aspects.

    “I am not here to establish conspiracy. That’s not my job. That is the job of the SIT,” Sibal said, adding, “My grievance is that they have not investigated it.”

    He said despite there being “actionable evidence on record”, the SIT or the magistrate did not take note of it.

    Sibal said he had demonstrated during his arguments before the apex court about how there was police inaction, complicity, and failure of concerned authorities to take preventive action during that time.

    “Your lordships have given us, I would say, my lords, a hearing that only suggests that this court gives the maximum leeway when issues of great magnitude come before this court and it is in that spirit that your lordships have heard me,” he said.

    Sibal concluded the day’s submissions by saying “the Republic is like a ship. That has to be made steady and the ship will only be steady if the majesty of law prevails.”

    The bench, after hearing Sibal’s submissions, said it would hear senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, who is appearing for the SIT, on Wednesday.

    Sibal had earlier argued that Zakia Jafri’s complaint of 2006 was that there was “a larger conspiracy where there was bureaucratic inaction, police complicity, hate speeches and unleashing of violence”.

    Rohatgi had earlier told the apex court that Zakia Jafri’s complaint alleging larger conspiracy was thoroughly examined after which the SIT concluded that there was no material to take it forward.

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

    On February 8, 2012, the SIT had filed a closure report giving a clean chit to Modi, now the Prime Minister, and 63 others including senior government officials, saying there was “no prosecutable evidence” against them.

    Zakia Jafri had filed a petition in the apex court in 2018 challenging the Gujarat High Court’s October 5, 2017 order rejecting her plea against the SIT decision.

    The high court in its October 2017 order had said the SIT probe was monitored by the Supreme Court.

    However, it partly allowed Zakia Jafri’s petition as far as its demand for a further investigation was concerned.

  • SIT did no investigation, protected people from being prosecuted in 2002 riots, Zakia Jafri tells SC

    By PTI

    NEW DELHI: The Special Investigation Team (SIT) had not conducted any probe on the alleged larger conspiracy in the 2002 Gujarat riots and there was an effort to “protect” and ensure that people from the Bajrang Dal, police, bureaucracy and others are not prosecuted, Zakia Jafri told the Supreme Court on Thursday.

    The wife of slain Congress leader Ehsan Jafri, who was killed at Gulberg society in Ahmedabad on February 28, 2002 during the violence, has challenged the SIT’s clean chit to 64 people including Narendra Modi, the then Gujarat chief minister during the riots.

    Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Zakia Jafri, told a bench headed by Justice A M Khanwilkar that the SIT did not do its job and the inaction by the concerned authorities of the state during the violence allowed the mob to “run amok”.

    “There was no investigation at all. There was only an effort to protect and to ensure that nobody is prosecuted. It was to protect VHP people, Bajrang Dal people, protect policemen, protect the bureaucracy. That is what was done by the SIT,” Sibal told the bench, also comprising Justices Dinesh Maheshwari and C T Ravikumar.

    During the day-long arguments, which would continue on November 16, the senior advocate said that Zakia Jafri’s complaint of 2006 alleging larger conspiracy in the riots was not investigated by the SIT.

    He told the bench that whosoever “collaborated” in the larger conspiracy was “accommodated in a very big way”.

    “Who is involved and in what manner he is involved, that was never investigated,” he said, adding that the obligation of an investigating agency is to ensure that victims get justice.

    He said the most important part of an investigation is the purity of the process and if that “purity vanishes and it is polluted, you are left with nothing”.

    He also referred to the alleged inaction by the concerned authorities during the 2002 violence in Gujarat.

    The bench observed that inaction during investigation is different than inaction during commission of crime.

    When Sibal argued the petitioner had earlier said that investigation was slow, the bench said, “That was corrected by the Supreme Court by appointing an SIT”.

    The senior advocate argued that question which arises for consideration is why these things happened and why the SIT did not look into all these.

    “They (concerned authorities) allowed the mob to run amok,” he said, adding it was because of the conspiracy that no action was taken at that time.

    “If your investigation is impure like this then how will one ensure justice for the victim,” he said.

    Sibal told the bench that without a “pure and unbiased investigation”, the procedure established by the law would be violated.

    Referring to Article 14 of the Constitution, which deals with equality before law, Sibal said the State cannot deny equality and the State includes investigating machinery.

    He said investigation means to trace out and the whole purpose of it is fact finding.

    Sibal told the bench that an SIT was set up by the apex court in the Gujarat riots case because the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) had moved the top court saying the local police was not investigating the matter properly.

    “I am not making any allegations. I am only saying that the SIT did not do its job,” he said, adding that several crucial materials, including a sting operation and call detail records, were not looked into by the SIT.

    The senior advocate also recounted that during the 1984 anti-Sikh riots, when he was residing in Maharani Bagh area here, the mob came and attacked only two houses of Sikh people which were pre-identified.

    Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for the SIT, had told the apex court on Wednesday that Zakia Jafri’s complaint alleging larger conspiracy was thoroughly examined after which the SIT came to the conclusion that there was no material to take it forward.

    Ehsan Jafri, the former MP, was among the 68 people killed in the violence, a day after the S-6 Coach of the Sabarmati Express was burnt at Godhra killing 59 people and triggering riots in Gujarat.

    Sibal had earlier argued that Zakia Jafri’s complaint was that there was “a larger conspiracy where there was bureaucratic inaction, police complicity, hate speeches and unleashing of violence”.

    On February 8, 2012, the SIT had filed a closure report giving a clean chit to Modi, now the Prime Minister, and 63 others including senior government officials, saying there was “no prosecutable evidence” against them.

    Zakia Jafri had filed a petition in the apex court in 2018 challenging the Gujarat High Court’s October 5, 2017 order rejecting her plea against the SIT decision.

    The plea also maintained that after the SIT gave 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 “substantiated merits”.

    It also said the high court “failed to appreciate” the petitioner’s complaint which was independent of the Gulberg Society case registered at a Police Station in Ahmedabad.

    The high court in its October 2017 order had said the SIT probe was monitored by the Supreme Court.

    However, it partly allowed Zakia Jafri’s petition as far as its demand for a further investigation was concerned.

    It had said the petitioner can approach an appropriate forum, including the magistrate’s court, a division bench of the high court, or the Supreme Court seeking further investigation.

  • Zakia Jafri questions SIT role in Gujarat riots inquiry

    By Express News Service

    NEW DELHI:  Appearing for Zakia Jafri, widow of Ehsan Jafri who was killed in the 2002 Gujarat riots, senior advocate Kapil Sibal told the Supreme Court on Wednesday that he too has been a victim of communal violence, having lost maternal grandparents after the partition of India in 1947.

    “Communal violence is like lava erupting from a volcano. It is institutionalised violence. Wherever that lava touches, it scars the earth. It is a fertile ground for future revenge,” Sibal said. Arguing before a bench of Justices AM Khanwilkar, Dinesh Maheshwari and CT Ravikumar, Sibal said the Special Investigative Team looking into the Gujarat riots ignored a mass of evidence and drew conclusions without any investigation.

    “SIT did not record statements, seize phones, check how bombs were manufactured and straightaway filed closure reports,” Sibal said, challenging the clean chit given by SIT to the accused including then Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi.

    He said the SIT ignored the tapes of a sting operation by Tehelka magazine, in which many gave statements on their participation in violence and accumulation of arms. Although these tapes were used for conviction in the Naroda Patya case and the Gujarat HC had endorsed their authenticity, the SIT ignored them in Jafri’s complaint.

    Congress MP Jafri was among the 68 killed on February 28, 2002 — a day after a coach of the Sabarmati Express was burnt,  killing 59 and triggering riots.

  • Gujarat riots: Supreme Court to hear plea of Zakia Jafri against clean chit to Narendra Modi on Oct 26 

    By PTI

    NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court Tuesday said it would hear on October 26 a plea filed by Zakia Jafri, the wife of slain Congress leader Ehsan Jafri, challenging the Special Investigation Team (SIT) clean chit to Narendra Modi, who was the Gujarat chief minister during the 2002 riots in the state.

    A bench headed by Justice A M Khanwilkar made it clear that no request for further adjournment at the instance of the petitioner (Zakia Jafri) will be entertained on future dates.

    “At the request of the petitioner, hearing is deferred till October 26,” said the bench, also comprising justices Dinesh Maheshwari and C T Ravikumar.

    “It is made clear that no request for further adjournment at the instance of the petitioner on any count will be entertained on future dates,” said the bench, which granted liberty to the petitioner to file additional compilation in the matter.

    At the outset, senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Zakia Jafri, said this matter has suddenly come up and there are about 23,000 pages of record and they would circulate a convenience compilation.

    The bench said the matter was notified well in advance.

    “No my lords, it was suddenly notified on Friday,” Sibal said, adding, it was adjourned in April this year and because of the pandemic, it did not come up.

    He requested the bench to list the matter on a fixed date. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta said the request on the ground of convenience compilation is being raised for the last one-and-a-half year.

    “There is no notice issued, there is no stay, my friend cannot possibly object,” Sibal said.

    However, the bench observed, “Mr.Sibal, we think that Mr.Solicitor General was very considerate in saying only one-and-a-half year. The matter is pending from 2018.”

    In April this year, the apex court had said that the matter would be listed after two weeks as the petitioner had circulated a letter seeking adjournment in the case.

    Zakia Jafri’s counsel had earlier told the top court that notice needs to be issued in the plea as it relates to an alleged “larger conspiracy” from February 27, 2002, to May 2002.

    Ehsan Jafri, the former MP, was among the 68 people killed at Gulberg Society in Ahmedabad on February 28, 2002, a day after the S-6 Coach of the Sabarmati Express was burnt at Godhra killing 59 people and triggering riots in Gujarat.

    On February 8, 2012, the SIT had filed a closure report giving a clean chit to Modi, now the prime minister, and 63 others, including senior government officials, saying there was “no prosecutable evidence” against them.

    Zakia Jafri had filed a petition in the apex court in 2018 challenging the Gujarat High Court’s October 5, 2017 order rejecting her plea against the decision of the SIT.

    The plea also maintained that after the SIT gave 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 “substantiated merits”.

    It also said the high court “failed to appreciate” the petitioner’s complaint which was independent of the Gunbarrel Society case registered at Meghaninagar Police Station.

    The high court in its October 2017 order had said the SIT probe was monitored by the Supreme Court.

    However, it partly allowed Zakia Jafri’s petition as far as its demand for a further investigation was concerned.

    It had said the petitioner can approach an appropriate forum, including the magistrate’s court, a division bench of the high court, or the Supreme Court seeking further investigation.