Guj HC judge declines to hear petition against SIT probe

Agencies Tags : Gujarat HC, SIT, Narendra Modi, post Godhra riots Posted: Monday , Jul 06, 2009 at 1536 hrs Ahmedabad:

Related Articles
Most Read Articles

Rajkot MP gets extortion call SC stays Ishrat case in Gujarat High Court Only one-third of Vibrant Gujarat investment promises kept: Study Kuber crew officially still ‘missing’, to get grant but conditional Pragya’s relative beaten up Victim identifies three women neighbours who helped Gujarat rioters

Paa India, US in talks to conduct joint services war game Al-Qaeda helping LeT to provoke Indo-Pak conflict: US Mumbai Test: Sehwag and a deluge of records Dr Batra’s clinic ordered to compensate man for harassment CPM minister appoints daughter-in-law as cook, promotes her as officer Will give proof of TMC-Maoist link: CPM

Discussion
Blogs

Who is to blame? - By Lalit Funny - By Jay i am in -charge ... - By Jatinder S Hoon Truthe prevailed - By manas sinha Mad dame - By kaur sing Its a good movie.. - By tito Paa - By P N SUKHEJA

The pounds are flying off How many more?Lets change India Sanskrit Festivals

The Gujarat High Court judge hearing the petition challenging the probe by special investigation team (SIT) against Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi and 62 others, on Monday declined from hearing the case.

When the matter came up for hearing in the court of Justice H N Devani she said, "not before me" and declined to hear the matter due to some personal reasons. The case will now be referred to another court based on instruction by the High Court Chief Justice.

The petition was filed last month by former BJP MLA from Lunavada Kalubai Hirabhai Malivad against the probe by Supreme Court-appointed SIT with regard to a complaint made by Zakia Jaffrey, in which she has alleged that Modi, his cabinet colleagues, police officials and senior bureaucrats aided and abetted post-Godhra riots of 2002.

Zakia's husband ex-MP Ehsan Jaffrey was killed during the 2002 riots in Gulburg society along with 39 others.

Ads by Google

The Apex court had ordered the SIT to probe the complaint within three months and submit its report.

Malivad, one of the persons named in Zakia's complaint, in his petition had demanded stay on investigations and directions from the court to restrain SIT from arresting persons named in the complaint including Modi.

Raising legal question on the investigation being carried out by SIT, Malivad had contended that the Apex court had asked SIT to "look into" the complaint, and this does not empower it to investigate the case as per provisions of CrPC, as there is no FIR registered in this matter.

... contd.

Single Page Format

Next1 2

Comments

Post comment

View all Comments (8) |

Sometimes average people need to do a little research...By: Jai Hind | 10-Jul-2009 Reply | Forward We fail to understand why a judge would refuse a hearing. Think of the following situations:In this case maybe there are several accused who maybe not be guilty.If the judge knows even one person out of the several accused due to personal reasons he/she may not decide on the case as it would only be read as "biased" judgement.

No difference between Pakistani Judges and Gujrath Judges, both work under the directives of fanatics.By: SHAME ON TAX EVADING GUJRATHI BUSINESSMEN | 07-Jul-2009 Reply | Forward The atmosphere in Gujrath, even after 9 years is not peaceful.Modi the butcher has taken over complete control og Judiciary,Executive and legislation.If the central govt. is serious in punishing the guilty, then MODI shall be arrested and a free and fair trail shall eb conducted.These RSS/BJP/VHP GOONS HAVE COMMITTED THE MOST HEINOUS CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY, INIDA WILL NEVER PROGRESS UNLESS JUSTICE IS METED OUT TO THE VICTIMS, NOT JUST GUJARATA, BUT IN ALLTHE CASES WHICH ARE INFLUENCED BY PSEUDO HINDUTVADI MORONS.

Guj HC judge declines to hear petition against SIT probeBy: darvan | 07-Jul-2009 Reply | Forward Trivialisation of justice comes to mind here.How could a judge pick and choose his/her brief? Isnt she duty bound to hear the case or admit her involvement in the case.No wonder Pakistani Judge is dithering on Mumbai terrorists. Isnt there a superior authority to intervene and suspend the judge for complcity? Her behavior indicts her to involvment in the case which she must be disclose or be sacked. Getting away like this is a mockery of justice

INCREDIBLE!By: Vinod Dawda | 07-Jul-2009 Reply | Forward The whole exercise of SIT smacks of political vendetta. The whole tragedy has had so many bodies spending a fortune from the taxpayers (including the relatives of those killed), that it is hard to see any more meaningful outcome. The whole saga is mired by mindless media frenzy and political dance. Even if one assumes a degree of reluctance by the political machinery to act fast enough it is not hard to see that the process was largely a mob frenzy which would have been hard to handle even with the best equipped forces of a richer and developed country. It may be argued that the Hindus should not have been angered after some sixty of them got burnt alive. Hindus should have shown their legendary ability to bow down against any form of violence. It is sad that the government spent more resources on scapegoats and mudslinging rather than the victims. The legal system that allows such a sequence of drama can not be considered fair or capable of delivering justice when faced with best liars and lawyers.Time to change and move forward.

Do the judges have the right to pick and chose cases they could hear in their court?By: Hary Nambiar | 06-Jul-2009 Reply | Forward Refusal to hear the case by the Judge is absurd. Do the judge have the right to pick and chose cases they could hear in their court?

Close
Please Login

User ID	*
Password	*

	Forgot Password? click here