SIT finds no evidence against Modi

The Hindu

Ahmadabad: April 10, 2012: The Supreme Court-appointed Special Investigation Team has given him a clean chit in the post-Godhra Gulberg massacre case and sought its closure as it found no evidence against him.

 

“According to the SIT, no offence has been established against any of the 58 persons listed in Zakia’s complaint,” Metropolitan magistrate M.S. Bhatt said in his order on Tuesday on a batch of petitions in which Zakia Jafri, widow of former Congress MP Ehsan Jafri had named Mr. Modi and 57 others for alleged criminal conspiracy in the 2002 riots. Ehsan Jafri was among the 69 persons killed in the Gulberg society carnage.

 

The court ordered that a copy of the SIT report and related documents be given to Ms. Zakia Jafri within 30 days giving her the right to pursue her private criminal complaint against Mr. Modi and others.

 

It will now have to decide whether to accept or reject the closure report after hearing the complainant.

 

“Therefore, as per the Supreme Court’s order and principles of natural justice the complainant has to be given copy of the report and related documents,” it said, adding no notice was needed to be issued to Ms. Zakia Jafri as she had already approached the court seeking a copy of the report.

 

“It is hereby ordered that as per Supreme Court order Zakia will be given copies of the investigation report, statements of witnesses and all related documents within 30 days of this order.”

 

Ms. Zakia Jafri had filed a complaint against Mr. Modi, his Ministerial colleagues, top police officials and Bharatiya Janata Party functionaries accusing them of wider conspiracy in the riots in which more than 1,000 people, mostly Muslims, had been killed.

 

The Supreme Court had ordered an inquiry into the complaint filed by her and appointed the SIT headed by R.K. Raghavan to probe it.

 

Mr. Raghavan said the complainant will have an opportunity to contest the findings of the SIT report.

 

“We have filed a report saying no evidence on the contents of the particular petition was available and we have recommended closure,” he said.

 

“We have done our duty to the best of our abilities,” he said, adding the integrity of the team cannot be questioned in arriving at its conclusion.

 

Raju Ramachandran, appointed by the Supreme Court as amicus curiae (friend of the court), hoped his independent report on the SIT document will also be given to the complainant, who has a right to file a “protest petition” in court.

 

Refusing to disclose the contents of his report, Mr. Ramachandran said he has given an “independent assessment” on the SIT report.

 

The SIT had submitted its report to the Supreme Court after conducting investigations into Ms. Zakia Jafri’s complaint during which it questioned several people, including Mr. Modi.

 

The Supreme Court after going through the report had asked Mr. Ramchandran to independently verify the SIT’s findings. He had also submitted his report to the Supreme Court.

 

The Supreme Court had after going through both the reports directed the SIT to submit a final report, along with the entire material collected by the SIT, to the court of the Metropolitan Magistrate. The SIT submitted its final report on February 28, 2012.

 

In its order dated September 12, 2011, the Supreme court had said that if the SIT found there was no sufficient evidence or reasonable grounds for proceeding against any person named in the complaint, the court shall, before taking a final decision on such "closure" report, issue notice to the complainant and make available to her copies of the statements of the witnesses, other related documents and the investigation report.

 

Reacting to the SIT’s closure report, Ms. Zakia Jafri said she was “pained” and vowed to continue her battle for justice.

 

“In the court of the Lord above, justice can get delayed but not denied. I am sure that truth will come out and I will get justice,” she said.

 

Acknowldeging that the path ahead was difficult, she said,” court follows the truth and I have full faith in it.”

 

Teesta Setalvad of the NGO Citizen for Peace and Justice, working for the riots victims, said, “It is a huge disappointment as the SIT has filed a closure report, worst fears have come alive.”

 

“Amicus Curiae Raju Ramchandran had also submitted a report on the SIT findings, we have to see that whether that report has been included by the SIT in the final report submitted to the metropolitan magistrate,” Ms. Setalvad said.

 

Ms. Setalvad said the court should hear them before taking a final decision on the SIT report.

 

Tanvir Jafri, son of Eshan Jafri, said he had the apprehension about the SIT filing a closure report. “It is the SIT which is saying that (there is no evidence against Mr. Modi) and not the court. We had this fear that they are going to file a closure report.

 

“SIT’s judgement (sic) is not of any value if magistrate decides against it. It may take time but we are going to fight it out,” he said.

 

BJP leader Yatin Oza, however, described the closure report as “a big slap” on the face of those who have been criticising Mr. Modi “at the behest of our opponents”.