Former Liberhan lawyer questions worth of probe

Liberhan Commission counsel Anupam Gupta, who cross-examined BJP stalwart LK Advani and former prime minister the late PV Narasimha Rao, among others, quit the assignment three years ago, just when the fact-finding panel began penning its report.

Gupta of Chandigarh said he left the commission because he didn’t agree with justice (retired) MS Liberhan’s soft approach towards Advani.

The BJP leader’s testimony and cross-examination run into 192 pages against Rao’s deposition of about 20 pages.

Had Gupta stayed back, the commission could have filed the report two years ago. But since he quit, the depositions had be recorded afresh.

Liberhan and Gupta had practiced together in the Punjab and Haryana high court. Later, Liberhan became a judge in the Madras high court and was subsequently, elevated as the chief justice of the Andhra Pradesh high court.

Gupta has his doubts about the usefulness of the Liberhan Commission report. “I had often disagreed on several important issues relating to the commission’s inquiry. We differed on the role and relevance of ideology and history in the probe. I’m convinced the probe cannot yield anything fruitful or enduring unless it addresses the ideological moorings of the movement. The report will be worth very little if these aspects and issues are sidestepped or underplayed,’’ he said.

“I also believe the principal challenge before the commission in terms of personalities is how it evaluates the roles and responsibilities of Advani and Rao. I would like the report to dwell on it comprehensively and in a principled manner,” Gupta told DNA.
“I am not certain whether justice Liberhan accords Advani and Rao the same central importance as I do, or whether he would like to address their role and responsibility,” he said.

So what went wrong? “Relations had come under a strain midway during my examination of Advani, who was then the home minister,” Gupta said tactfully.

“On June 13, 2001, a major confrontation took place between Advani and me in the court on the issue of Nehru’s attitude to the renovation of the Somnath temple,” he said, recalling what he had written in a magazine then.

“Advani lost his cool and lodged a strong verbal protest with the judge (Liberhan). That evening, justice Liberhan asked me to tone down my questioning of Advani. I refused and told him I’ll quit the commission the next morning but only after making a statement in court. Until then, my examination of Advani, though sharp, was marked by certain warmth. But after this, he became wary of me.”

Gupta said he had differences with Liberhan on whether the final report should analyse the ideological and historical aspects of the movement that led to the demolition of the Babri mosque on December 6, 1992.