Latching on to Supreme Court judgement in Akshardham temple attack case,JD(U) today accused BJP leader Amit Shah and Gujarat government of "misusing" state machinery "against a particular community" and demanded that other such cases should be transferred out of that state.
In a major setback to Gujarat government, the Supreme Court had on May 16 acquitted all six convicts, including three condemned prisoners, in the 2002 Akshardham temple attack case, saying "the story of the prosecution crumbles down at every juncture".
In a press release, JD (U) general secretary K C Tyagi said, "The Supreme Court judgement clearly raises the doubt on the intention of Gujarat government against the innocents and minorities in their state. BJP has called cases against Amit Shah in three staged killing as politically motivated.
"If cases against Shah are politically motivated then why not such cases of innocents like Adambhai Sulemanbhai Ajmeri and Abdul Kayum should also be treated as politically motivated?".
Adam Ajmeri, Shan Miya alias Chand Khan and Mufti Abdul Qyyum Mansuri were awarded the death sentence in July, 2006, by the special court set up to try the case under POTA.
Tyagi said "strict actions are required against police officials and the then Home Minister Amit Shah for implicating innocent people in false cases and making their family life miserable."
He said his party condemns the state government for "misusing" their anti terrorist cell and the entire state machinery..."against a particular community" and demanded that the cases of all such undertrials, who are lodged in Gujarat jails, should be transferred out of Gujarat.
Tyagi also demanded that an independent agency should be given responsibility to investigate each and every case to save innocent people from being convicted.
"As BJP PM designate Narendra Modi has been saying 'acche din aane waale hai', people of this country would like to know if good days are ahead only for Amit Shah or innocent citizens of this country as well," the JD(U) general secretary said.
The Supreme Court in its order had said, "the present case does not show that the sanctioning authority had applied its mind to the satisfaction as to whether granting of sanction (was needed)
"....This would go to show clear non-application of mind by the Home Minister in granting sanction. Therefore, the sanction is void on the ground of non-application of mind and is not a legal and valid sanction under Section 50 of POTA".
){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}