Sign In / Register
Make This My Home Page | Feedback |RSS
Channels Astrology | Cricket | Tenders | Classified | Blogs | Shopping | Opinions | Hotel| Travel
You are here: IE »   Story

Guj HC judge declines to hear petition against SIT probe

8 Comments | Post Comment
FontLarger | Smaller
  • Print
  • Mail This Article
  • Comments
  • Add to favorites
    • Agencies Tags : Gujarat HC, SIT, Narendra Modi, post Godhra riots Posted: Monday , Jul 06, 2009 at 1536 hrs

    Last month, following the notice from the High Court SIT had filed a reply to Malivad's petition in the form of an affidavit and said that the exercise undertaken by them in connection with the Supreme Court's order on Zakia Jaffery's complaint was a "preliminary inquiry" as per law.

    The affidavit filed by SIT Convenor Geetha Johri stated that the probe by the agency was as per Supreme Court orders and was permissible, even though there was no FIR lodged in the matter, or court orders, under provisions of Section 173(8) or 202 of Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC).

    Single Page Format
    Previous12
    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?
    Post a Comment
    View all Comments (8)
    Name:
    Email:
    Title:
    Maximum characters allowed     
    Comment:
    TERMS OF USE:
    The views, opinions and comments posted are your, and are not endorsed by this website. You shall be solely responsible for the comment posted here. The website reserves the right to delete, reject, or otherwise remove any views, opinions and comments posted or part thereof. You shall ensure that the comment is not inflammatory, abusive, derogatory, defamatory &/or obscene, or contain pornographic matter and/or does not constitute hate mail, or violate privacy of any person (s) or breach confidentiality or otherwise is illegal, immoral or contrary to public policy. Nor should it contain anything infringing copyright &/or intellectual property rights of any person(s).
    I agree to the terms of use.