SC: Did we deviate from rules in post-Godhra riots?

NEW DELHI: After the pro-active monitoring of Gujarat riot case trials and setting up the special investigation team (SIT) to plug loopholes in probes, the Supreme Court on Wednesday appeared to be standing at a crossroads with a strong doubt -- Did it deviate from the procedure laid down in the law?



Despite being targeted by petitioner NGO `Citizen for Justice and Peace\' that he has \"unethically\" switched sides by now appearing for an accused though he had appeared for CJP earlier, senior advocate Ram Jethmalani was relentless in pointing out that the court did deviate from the course prescribed by the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC).



\"Why is the SIT being cross-examined about the lapses in the investigation by the apex court even after filing of charegsheets? Is it not the prerogative of the accused to point out these lapses to the trial court? Is it not for the accused to cross-examine the investigating officer at the fag end of the trial? Why are these statutory rights of the accused being interfered with by the SC,\" Jethmalani asked.



An exasperated Bench comprising Justices D K Jain, P Sathasivam and Aftab Alam said: \"We are deviating from the real issue. It concerns all of us. But we are deviating for reasons best known to the petitioner and the state government.\"



The lead judge of the Bench, Justice Jain, appeared to express reservations on the manner in which the proceedings have gone so far in the riot cases. \"At least as far as I am concerned, it appears very, very unusual. Whatever little knowledge of Criminal Procedure Code I had, I have forgotten. Where does it end?\"



Adding to Jethmalani\'s persistent legal barrage, Gujarat government counsel Mukul Rohatgi added a flurry of questions -- \"Is the Centre controlling the public prosecutors? How come the Centre comes to know about the grievance of PPs first and the state has no knowledge of it? How are they commenting against the trial judges?\"



He was referring to Solicitor General Gopal Subramaniam pointing out to the court during the last hearing about a second public prosecutor who expressed displeasure over the manner in which the apex court-appointed SIT headed by former CBI director R K Raghavan was probing the riot case and the way the trial court judge was handling the proceedings.



Amicus curiae Harish Salve attempted to put a lid over the charged emotions by saying \"politics must be kept out of these proceedings\" and told the court that henceforth he would not share any information with anyone, not even the SG, relating to the riot cases.



But, Justice Jain still gave vent to his frustration over the conduct of the present lot of public prosecutors, especially the PP in question in the Gujarat riot case.



\"I do not approve of PPs and investigating officers coming out of the trial court and giving statements to the Press as if to show they were the best PPs and IOs. What are they trying to say? I do not like this,\" he said.



Taking a swipe at the conduct of the Gujarat PP, Justice Jain said: \"Now PPs are trying to tell that the judge is not conducting the trial properly. The trial judge is a senior judicial officer selected by the Chief Justice of the HC on the request of this court specially for the trial of the riot cases. We know under what pressure the trial judges are working. And now the PP is taking the role of a judge. If every PP stands behaving like this, then how would the justice delivery system function? PPs cannot make such statements.\"



\"If the PP was facing any problem, he was free to withdraw himself from the case. Now he is writing e-mails saying I am not happy with the judge. If he is not happy, the only thing he can do is quit after pointing it out to the seniors and not writing e-mails to all and sundry,\" said an anguished Justice Jain.



Jethmalani chose to respond to CJP counsel Kamini Jaiswal\'s charge that he had appeared for CJP and now for the accused by saying she was too small to make ethics an issue and to level accusations against him. When Jaiswal said that at the Bar everyone was equal, Jethmalani said he had fought elections against Atal Bihari Vajpayee demanding transfer of the trials from Gujarat to other states and that he did not need a certificate from anyone.




News From: http://www.7StarNews.com