‘Sukna probe unfair,mockery of justice’

“After completion of the Court of Inquiry,it will be open for the Court of Inquiry to give its finding on the petitioner (Prakash). The authorities will be free to decide the fate of the case,that is,whether to send it or not for court martial,” the tribunal’s Principal Bench of Justice A K Mathur and Lt-Gen S S Dhillon said in their judgment today.

This did not prevent the tribunal from passing scathing remarks about the manner in which the CoI was held.

“This was not a fair trial,” the bench said. “In the present case,the manner in which this Court of Inquiry had been held looks little strange that some witnesses appeared before the Court of Inquiry and gave their statements. Then these witnesses came again and deposed something more,which was not in their main statements. This kind of rumbling carries on,witnesses were coming and going,” the bench observed.

Prakash had moved the tribunal against the recommendation of the CoI held at the Kolkata Headquarters,Bengal Area on September 30,2009 to indict him for allegedly influencing the then General Officer Commanding 33 Corps P K Rath to issue a no-objection certificate (NOC) for the transfer of 71.55 acres adjacent to the Sukna military station to friend and real estate developer Dilip Agarwal.

The judgment reads how the CoI made a “mockery of the principles of natural justice” when Prakash was summoned as a witness only after all the other witnesses had deposed prior to him. Even the examination of the 18 witnesses were done in a “haphazard manner”,said the tribunal.

“Lt-Gen PK Rath changed his statement thrice,likewise,Lt Gen R Halgali twice,Maj. Gen PC Sen twice and Colonel N K Dabbas twice,” the court said.

As far as Prakash was concerned,the court said “he did not even know what has been deposed against him”.

The court gave Prakash permission to examine Lt.Col Jiji Verghese,Lt Gen PK Rath,Lt Gen R Halgali,Maj Gen PC Sen,Col NK Dabbas and Naib Subeidar Surjit Singh.

The tribunal observed that the “mandatory provision” of Army Rule 180,which prescribes the presence of the accused officer at the CoI,was not followed in the case of Lt-Gen Prakash,who is the seniormost general ever in the Indian Army to be attached to face court martial proceedings for his alleged role in the scandal.

The bench pointed out that the inquiry failed to issue notice under Army Rule 180 to Lt-Gen Prakash even after his name cropped up for the first time in Lt-Gen Rath’s statement on November 7,2009. Prakash was summoned only 10 days after,that too as a witness. Interestingly,he was first cross-examined by some of the other 18 witnesses,who were themselves “facing inquiry”.

“We fail to understand the manner in which this Court of Inquiry was conducted. The normal rule is that the witness should depose in the presence of the person whose reputation is under stake,” the court said.