SIT clears CM of all charges, declares Bhatt ‘unreliable’; but amicus curiae’s views could still put Modi in the dock.
It seems Zakia Jafri's quest for justice now depends on the outcome of the battle between chief minister Narendra Modi and suspended IPS officer Sanjiv Bhatt.
The much-awaited final report of the Supreme Court-appointed special investigation team (SIT) on its investigation into Zakia Jafri's complaint was finally made public on Tuesday evening.
The report gives a clean chit to chief minister Narendra Modi though amicus curiae Raju Ramachandran, in his separate report, has suggested that the chief minister can be prosecuted under three sections of the CrPC.
Ramachandran had made this suggestion relying mainly on the statements and affidavit of suspended IPS officer Sanjiv Bhatt. In his affidavit, Bhatt has alleged that at a meeting held on February 27, 2002, Modi had instructed the police to let Hindus vent their anger against Muslims.
But before Modi can be prosecuted, Bhatt must pass the "test of cross-examination" in a court of law, the amicus curiae's report says.
And the court must accept that Bhatt was indeed present at the meeting where the CM allegedly made this statement, Ramachandran has stated in his report.
In its bulky 541-page final report, the SIT has exonerated Modi of all charges, including the charges levelled against him by Bhatt.
The other charges - bringing bodies of the karsevaks to Ahmedabad, making provocative speeches at public meetings and the media, not visiting relief camps for victims and giving plum posting to officers who had supported the government - have all been rejected as not substantiated. Though the amicus curiae has relied on Bhatt's statement to leave the matter of Modi's prosecution to the trial court, the SIT did not consider the IPS officer a reliable witness.
Unlike Ramachandran, the SIT relied on various communications forwarded by the Gujarat government alleging Bhatt's connivance with NGOs, Teesta Setalvad, leaders of the opposition Congress, journalists and some alleged anti-Gujarat activists.
The communications had mentioned various emails forwarded by Bhatt to such persons.
"From a study of emails, it appears that certain vested interests, including Sanjiv Bhatt, different NGOs and some political leaders were trying to use the Supreme Court as a forum to settle their scores," the SIT report says. The probe team has further alleged in the report that this also goes to show that "Sanjiv Bhatt had been colluding with persons with vested interests to see that some kind of charge-sheet is filed against Narendra Modi and others."
Now it would be interesting to see whether or not the court accepts Sanjiv Bhatt's testimony as credible, during further hearing on the SIT's final report.
){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}