Ishrat Jahan case: HC: State resisting probe, reminds govt of its duty

The Gujarat high court, on Friday, reminded the Gujarat government about what an ideal state should do in a case like that of the Ishrat Jahan fake encounter. The HC also blamed the latter for resisting probe and advised its lawyer against becoming psychologically disturbed.

The court was hearing the status report filed by the CBI on the sensational case in which four persons — Ishrat Jahan, Javed Sheikh alias Pranesh Pillai, Amjad Ali and Zeeshan Johar — were killed in an encounter allegedly staged by the Gujarat police on June 15, 2004.

As CBI counsel Ejaz Khan was replying to queries raised by the court over whether IPS officer Satish Verma’s services were needed to assist the agency, additional advocate-general (AAG) Tushar Mehta suddenly rose from his chair shouting: “The CBI has become so insolvent that it cannot work without an officer?” Immediately, Justice Jayant Patel, who was at the bench with Justice Abhilasha Kumari, said: “Don’t become psychologically disturbed by all these things.”

The state’s allegation that the CBI carrying out a “sinister investigation” and that Verma was conducting a “witch-hunt” did not go down well with the court.

Justice Patel also shot off a host of questions at the AAG, who seemed to be trapped in his own arguments. “Explain to me what is the role of the state if it has been found that your officers had got the illegal custody of some people and they were liquidated by your officers?” said the judge.

He then asked: “We are asking you as an ideal state as to what is the duty of the state? To assist with the investigation or obstruct it?”

Replying in the positive to both the questions, Mehta said: “The right person should be made the accused. But not a person selected by any officer (Verma). The purpose of the court would be frustrated if something was done with extraneous reasons.”

“The CBI’s reports are contrary to what you are saying. It’s about non-cooperation of the state. We are a federal country and no state in the country would object to sparing one of its officers for a probe (contemplated by high court). Should I read the report aloud?” said the judge.

He further stated: “We are still unable to understand why the state wants to resist investigation.”  The court even declined to accept two CDs on the alleged conversation between the four, who were killed in an encounter, and Lashkar-e-Taiba operative Muzzamil that is believed to have been prepared by the central IB.

Mehta opened his arguments by flashing CDs at the bench: “These CDs will prove wrong the CBI investigation that the four were not in prior custody of the CBI. I am shocked when I saw it in two news channels.”  The court, however, refused to hear him and asked him to submit as evidence to the CBI. When the lawyer refused to stop, the judge said: “You need not invest time in that.”  Incidentally, the state has been opposing Verma’s deputation to the CBI to help with the probe as per the high court order. The case is also becoming politically significant as the agency is believed to be heading to nab top political leaders and police officers of the state.