SIT rubbishes his claims as a ploy to create pressure on court, amicus curiae.
Wednesday added a new twist to the ongoing Karpman drama triangle trials in the 2002 communal riots cases. The Supreme Court appointed Special Investigation Team (SIT) alleged that suspended IPS officer Sanjiv Bhatt was trying to build pressure on the Supreme Court bench and its amicus curiae Raju Ramachandran to favour the complaint made by Zakia Jafri, as the complaint lacked substance. This significant revelation can not only cloak Bhatt’s claims in a shroud of doubt, but also derail the proceedings so far.
SIT’s lawyer RS Jamuar claimed before the court of magistrate BJ Ganatra that the suspended IPS officer applied pressure tactics to manipulate proceedings during the hearing of the petition by Zakia Jafri seeking action against chief minister Narendra Modi when it was at a crucial stage during May to July 2011.
“It was the task of Sanjiv Bhatt to bring influence upon judiciary, amicus curiae Raju Ramachandran and other officers in order to favour the complaint (by Jafri) as it lacked substance,” claimed Jamuar, while talking to media persons.
“He was not a party, nor a petitioner in the Supreme Court. He was just trying to appear important or even as a khatarnaak (dangerous) witness. But we have never considered him as a witness,” Jamuar asserted.
The SIT lawyer based his claims upon several email conversations that Bhatt had allegedly made with some people before the Supreme Court verdict in this case in September, 2011. About 250 to 500 emails were collected by the state government and handed over to the SIT, in which emails made to Teesta Setalvad, a journalist Subhranshu, Gujarat’s former leader of opposition Shaktisinh Gohil and others surface.
Citing common conversation of these emails, Jamuar argued before the court that, “Bhatt was trying to manipulate the case by using media card to build pressure upon Raju Ramachandran and Supreme Court bench which was hearing Zakia’s petition and also the then home minister, P Chidambaram.”
He claimed that Bhatt had fabricated his presence in the meeting held at the chief minister’s residence on February 27, 2002. Reading out another of Bhatt’s email to senior IPS officer Rahul Sharma, Jamuar informed the court that, Bhatt had asked Sharma to confirm Haren Pandya’s presence at the meeting through his mobile phone movement. “If you (Bhatt) were there, where is the need to confirm this fact from others? He fabricated his presence,” Jamuar concluded.
Bhatt, by filing an affidavit before the Supreme Court in the Zakia’s petition, claimed that he was present in the meeting called by chief minister Narendra Modi who asked the police officials present there to ‘let the Hindus vent their anger against Muslims.’
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
)
)
)
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}