Justice AM Khanwilkar led bench hears a petition filed by Zakia Jafri, widow of slain Congress MP Ehsan Jafri, challenging the Special Investigation Team’s (SIT) clean chit to then Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi in the 2002 Godhra riots #supremecourt @narendramodi
SC: Mr Sibal, the best course would be not be going backwards...we have to start from the 2011 order.. there was an option to file a protest petition. history of 2009 and 2010 may not help us today. show us what report was presented and the protest plea filed in ref to the report
SC: Show us what ingredients of protest plea was not taken into account by the magistrate.
SC: whatever is presented before the magistrate is the relevant document and needs to be shown. You have to go by the record.
Sibal reads witness statements in the case.
Sibal: "not even one Muslim home was spared in the area.... when the witness saw the train burning he realised it was a big incident and thus there would be reaction to it"
Sibal: None of this was dealt with by anybody. Houses were burned, 106 properties in Dhansura, they were all destroyed. This particular sting, Ashish Khaitan was a prosecution witness in one of the cases...SIT relied on that sting in related to other accused.
Sibal: SIT relies on the sting operation and on this case discards it.
Sibal: We are not talking about Gulberg society we are talking about the entire state. if you limit it to Gulberg then it is the end of the matter.
SC: We are only going by your submissions
Sibal: I don't want to enter any political arena here. I only want the rule of law to be upheld
Sibal: My lord a private person was handed over the bodies of persons who were killed and burnt. The person to whom it was handed over was Jaydeep Patel. this calls for serious investigation
Sibal: By the time these bodies reached Ahmedabad 3,000 people were there, it was early morning at 4 am. who made those phone calls? jayanti patel? does it need investigation? yes. But SIT saying a departmental enquiry is not enough
What business does an urban development minister have in being in the police control room? Does this not need a probe? it is confirmed. he just says that he never instructed anyone anything and that is accepted !!: Sibal
Sibal: what is this going on? you accept the statement of potential accused and you order departmental enquiry against Mamlatdar. your lordships are far too experienced for me to even make submissions on this: Sibal
Sibal: Investigations have now been reduced to supporting the accused and this is what is happening in states
SC: please don't generalise this. volumes of records have been collected
Sibal: but see what have been done with it.
Sr Advocate Mukul Rohatgi appears for the SIT: we will show you that we have faithfully investigated everything. we have also delved into the minister aspect of this. This report runs into thousands of pages and several witnesses were examined
Rohatgi: the entire protest petition and every allegation is against the Chief Minister..it was alleged that CM ordered no action for 72 hours after train burning.. every allegation is against the then CM of Gujarat @narendramodi
Sibal: Perhaps my friend is not aware that we have documents and there are violent acts if massacre and murder. I don't want to be in a situation where i am forced to argue a point which i do not want to. I am not on individual acts but the manner in which probe was conducted
Sibal: the manner in which it was done was far away from established criminal practices.
Sibal: this now in 2021, this is from Feb 2002. For 19 years no one has asked this question. Wasn’t this responsibility of this great SIT that was constituted? What does law require? Law requires not to accept statements of accused, how can you close a probe like this?
Sibal: who will find out who were there in the control room. Where was the minister located when he was calling. All of this needs to be probed...
Justice Khanwilkar: We will intervene only if the investigation agency is compromised! We will not be intervening on account of ideology here
SC: Let Mr Rohatgi continue after the Diwali break,,,
Sibal: let me continue post the break also. You all should also take a break from this case
Rohatgi: if Mr Sibal can finish.... I will finish tomorrow
Sibal: That cannot happen (smiles)
SC: Mr Sibal submits that he will take some more time. Since the court will take a break next week, it will be appropriate that hearing continues after the #Diwali vacations
SC: Mr Sibal would be filing some additional documents. As a result, we defer the hearing to November 9, 2021 #gujaratriots#supremecourt
Sibal: please keep it virtually
SC: If there are PMLA matters then we will continue else it may be physical.
Sibal: smaller matters may be taken but not such large volumes
Wankhede counsel: No consent has been taken from the State. If Mumbai Police arrest me today, which is my apprehension, milords will not wait till the State flouts my rights.
Sr Adv Jaideep Gupta: the plea before you is the Joe Joseph vs State of Tamil Nadu. Parties have resolved differences apart from what height has to be maintained and what height should be of the reservoir level so that Tamil Nadu can draw some water
Sr Adv Jaideep Gupta: As per the rule curb prepared by state of kerala it indicates the levels which has to be maintained at different dates ... this takes into account the rainfall which has taken place for several years.
#SupremeCourt is hearing a challenge to the amendments to the FCRA and the rule mandating opening of an NGO's primary account in New Delhi SBI main branch #FCRA
Right to life and liberty under Article 21 does not encompass the right to receive unregulated foreign contributions, the Central government had told the Supreme Court while defending amendments made in 2020 to the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act (FCRA)
The plea by Noel Harper of NGO Care And Share Charitable Trust challenged Sections 7, 12A, 12(1A) and 17 inserted in the FCRA by the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Amendment Act, 2020 as ultra vires Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India #SupremeCourt
#SupremeCourt to hear an appeal by the NTA challenging a Bombay High Court order halting the declaration of results of the National Eligibility cum Entrance Test (NEET) for under graduate courses #NEETUG2021#NEETresults
SG Tushar Mehta appearing for the National Testing Agency #NEETResults
Counsel for the respondent : wrong answer sheet was given to us and wrong answers were given to questions. Then questions were attempted in hurry... The only solution was leniency. It was like a common order passed by HC.
#SupremeCourt to hear an application alleging violation of the order dated February 10, 2017 banning use of certain chemicals such as barium nitrite that is dangerous & beyond safety limits used by firecracker manufacturers #firecrackers
SC: When the earlier order of banning firecrackers was passed, it was passed after giving reasons. All crackers were not banned. : It was in larger public interest. It should not be projected that it was banned for particular purpose.
SC: Last time we said that we weren’t coming in way of enjoyment but we cannot come in way of Fundamental rights...