Comments
In a relief to the Gujarat Chief Minister, Mr Narendra Modi, the Supreme Court today refused to pass any order on his alleged inaction to contain the 2002 Gujarat riots after the Godhra carnage and referred the matter to the magistrate concerned in Ahmedabad for a decision.
A three-judge Bench headed by Mr Justice D.K. Jain directed the Special Investigation Team (SIT), which is probing the riot cases, to submit its final report before the magistrate who was asked to decide whether to proceed against Mr Modi and 62 others, which includes senior government officials.
The Bench made it clear that there was no need for it to further monitor the riot cases.
The Bench also comprising Justices Mr P. Sathasivam and Mr Aftab Alam said in case the magistrate decides to drop proceedings against Mr Modi and others, he has to hear the plea of slain MP Ehsan Jafri’s widow Zakia Jafri, who had filed a complaint against the Gujarat Chief Minister.
The court passed the order on a petition by Ms Zakia Jafri alleging that Mr Modi and 62 top Government officials deliberately refused to take action to contain the State-wide riots, triggered by the February 27, 2002, Godhra train carnage.
Ms Jafri, who lost her husband Ehsan Jafri, a former Congress MP in Gulberg Housing Society massacre during the riots, had told the apex court that a proper probe should be carried out by the SIT, headed by former CBI chief Mr R.K. Raghavan, into her allegations of inaction and various acts of omission and commission by Mr Modi and others after the riots.
The apex court had earlier handed over the task of probing the case to SIT which submitted its report in the court.
After the SIT filed its probe report in a sealed cover, the court had also asked senior advocate Mr Raju Ramachandran, who is assisting it as amicus curie, to analyse the SIT probe findings and file a confidential report on it.
Mr Ramachandran subsequently had submitted his report to the court, which passed the order after going through the reports by SIT and Mr Ramachandran and referred the case back to the Ahmedabad magistrate concerned to decide the further course of action in the case.
Comments
COMMENT NOW
Comments
Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.
We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of TheHindu Businessline and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.