In the past, several other sensitive cases from Gujarat have reached the apex court, with an allegation similar to the one attending to the 2008 blasts cases.
The stay imposed by the Supreme Court on the 2008 Ahmedabad blasts cases can lead the Gujarat government into another significant legal battle. In the past, several other sensitive cases from Gujarat have reached the apex court, with an allegation similar to the one attending to the 2008 blasts cases: the state police and judicial machinery are prejudiced.
As for the 2008 blasts cases, the accused are suspected to be the masterminds or the executors of the terror strikes that shook Gujarat, and major Indian cities such as Delhi, Mumbai, Jaipur and Bangalore. Of the 63 people currently lodged in the Sabarmati jail, 22 are from Gujarat.
For its part, the Gujarat government has exerted to justify its intention to hold the trial in the state. However, it could not prevail in important trials such as those involving the Best Bakery and Bilkis Banu cases, which were eventually held in Mumbai, and most of the accused convicted.
Gujarat also faced a setback in the Sohrabuddin encounter case. The investigation into the fake encounter was first carried out by state CID. However, the Supreme Court, dissatisfied with the probe, handed it over to the CBI. Thirteen cops, including three IPS officers, are behind bars for this staged encounter.
The Supreme Court has also handed over the investigation into the riot cases of 2002 to a Special Investigation Team. As for the Apex Court's order on the 2008 blasts cases, a retired police official said, “What needs to be seen now is what reply the state files in the apex court.”
A source in the legal fraternity said that the state government had to prove that the investigation into the blasts cases were proper. It is pertinent to note that the state police have revealed the terrorist module behind the Ahmedabad serial blasts.
A highly placed source in the state government said, “We are yet to receive the copy of the order of the court but the state government has decided to oppose the order once we receive the notice.” The source alleged that the apex court had passed its order without hearing the state government's contentions.
“That is shocking. We have called a meeting of the state's advocates in the Supreme Court and high court and are taking the opinion of other legal experts,” the source said.
){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}