Ahmedabad, March 16: Six days before Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi was to appear before the Special Investigation Team (SIT) in connection with the Gulbarg Society massacre case of 2002, the Supreme Court today gave an assurance to hear a plea to recall an order for a probe against Modi and 62 others.
The SIT had been tasked by a Supreme Court division bench – it was led by Justice Arijit Pasayat (now retired) – on April 27, 2009 “to take steps as required in law” and investigate any involvement of Modi, his Cabinet colleagues, senior police officials and bureaucrats in the post-Godhra communal riots.
The order was in response to a petition filed by Zakia Jafri, widow of former Congress MP Ehsan Jafri who was burnt alive with 39 others at the Gulbarg Society on February 28, 2002, a day after the attack on the Sabarmati Express in Godhra.
Acting on the complaint of Zakia, the SIT asked Modi to appear before it on March 21.
But senior advocate Ram Jethmalani, appearing for former BJP MLA Kalu Maliwad, today objected to the order to probe Modi and the others without giving them an opportunity to be heard.
Following this, a special three-judge bench of Justices D K Jain, P Sathasivam and Aftab Alam said: “We will consider whether this order (April 27, 2009) in entirety is to be continued or to be recalled.”
The court agreed to hear the allegation in a detailed manner tentatively on a date during “the week beginning on April 5”.
Jethmalani submitted that “the April 2009 order was passed without hearing these 63 persons. They are entitled to be heard”.
“Every person has a right to be heard. To send the cases of all 63 persons without hearing them was against the settled principles of law. It has never happened in the history of the Supreme Court,” contended Jethmalani.
He maintained that the April 2009 order suffered from other lacunae, including the appointment of DIG Shivanand Jha as a SIT member. “Shivanand Jha is an accused. The member of the SIT is an accused,” he said.
Meanwhile, Solicitor General Gopal Subramanium said a letter from R K Shah, Special Public Prosecutor in the Gulbarg Society case, indicated he suffered “taunts” from the trial judge and was intimidated by police officers.
R K Shah and his assistant Nayana Bhatt tendered their resignation before the SIT in early March. But both had been silent on the reasons for opting out.
Subramanium said the contents of the letter, which he called “self-explanatory”, had made him and Harish Salve, the Supreme Court amicus curiae in the post-Godhra riot cases, extremely concerned about the compliance of “certain minimal parameters of fairness” in the case.
He said he had specifically asked Shah to explain the reason behind his resignation. “I requested Mr Shah to give us a copy of the letter. Shah was initially reluctant. He is one of the seniormost lawyers available as Special Public Prosecutor. His words portray an element of anguish,” Subramanium submitted before the bench.
“My Lords, he cannot be subjected to taunts by the judge or intimidation by police officers. He was made to feel embarrassed by the SIT for asking questions in the trial. He has written against the conduct of the judge and the SIT in his letter dated February 26, 2010,” he said.
To this, the bench said it is up to the “prosecutor to follow whatever steps he wants” in a criminal trial.
—–Agencies