• About
  • Contcat Us
Friday, May 9, 2025
Justice Bench
No Result
View All Result
  • Login
  • Register
  • Home
  • Articles
  • Forums
  • Online Internship
  • Courses
  • Videos
  • Home
  • Articles
  • Forums
  • Online Internship
  • Courses
  • Videos
No Result
View All Result
justice bench
No Result
View All Result
ADVERTISEMENT
Home News

PM Narendra Modi gets a clean chit in Gujarat Riots, Supreme Court rejects Zakia Jafri plea – know more

S Sreedhar by S Sreedhar
June 24, 2022
in News
Reading Time: 5 mins read
0
0
PM Narendra Modi gets a clean chit in Gujarat Riots

PM Narendra Modi gets a clean chit in Gujarat Riots

0
SHARES
18
VIEWS

The Supreme Court Bench of Justices AM Khanwilkar, Dinesh Maheshwari and CT Ravikumar dismissed the appeal made by Zakia Jafri, the wife of former Congress member of parliament Ehsan Jafri, on Friday in the case of Zakia Ahsan Jafri vs. State of Gujarat, noting that there was no evidence to support a larger criminal conspiracy on the part of Prime Minister Narendra Modi. The appeal was made in relation to the clean bill given to Modi by the Special Investigation Team (SIT) in relation to the 2002 Gujarat riot

“The materials collected during the investigation do not give rise to strong or grave suspicion regarding hatching of larger criminal conspiracy at the highest level for causing mass violence across the State against the minority community and more so, indicating involvement of the named offenders and their meeting of minds at some level in that regard,” 

The Bench Stated

We are of the considered opinion that no fault can be found with the approach of the SIT in submitting final report dated 8.2.2012, which is backed by firm logic, expositing analytical mind and dealing with all aspects objectively for discarding the allegations regarding larger criminal conspiracy (at the highest level) for causing and precipitating mass violence across the State against the minority community during the relevant period. As aforementioned, the SIT has gone by the logic of falsity of the information or material and including the same remaining uncorroborated.”

The Court Upheld SIT report

On December 8, 2021, the Court had reserved judgement. The SIT members “came out with flying colours unscathed,” according to the Bench, who praised them for their “indefatigable work.” .The epithet “disgruntled” was also used to describe a number of Gujarati officials, notably former state DGP RB Sreekumar.

“At the end of the day, it appears to us that a coalesced effort of the disgruntled officials of the State of Gujarat along with others was to create sensation by making revelations which were false to their own knowledge. The falsity of their claims had been fully exposed by the SIT after a thorough investigation,” 

The Court Held

The Court emphasised that such officials needed to face charges for intentionally “keeping the pot boiling.”

READ ALSO

APERC’s Landmark Ruling Balancing Regulatory Autonomy and Renewable Energy Goals

Supreme Court Declines Order for ECI to Release Polling Booth Vote Counts

“Intriguingly, the present proceedings have been 305 pursued for last 16 years including with the audacity to question the integrity of every functionary involved in the process of exposing the devious stratagem adopted (to borrow the submission of learned counsel for the SIT), to keep the pot boiling, obviously, for ulterior design. As a matter of fact, all those involved in such abuse of process, need to be in the dock and proceeded with in accordance with law,” 

The Court Held

During the Gujarat riots, Ehshan Jafri killed in the infamous Gulbarg Society Massacre.

Following the riots in Gujarat, Zakia Jafri complained to the state’s then-director general of police in 2006 and asked for the filing of a First Information Report (FIR) under several sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), including Section 302. The Gujarat Chief Minister at the time, Modi, was named in the complaint along with other politicians and officials.

The High Court dismissed Jafri’s petition after upholding the Magistrate’s decision to accept the SIT’s closure report in the case and the Magistrate’s decision to reject the report’s findings. The Gujarat High Court’s 2017 ruling was contested in the appeal before the Supreme Court. 

The apex court established a SIT in 2008 to produce a report on a number of riot-related trials, and later ordered the SIT to look into the complaint made by Jafri. The SIT report cleared Modi, and in 2011, the Supreme Court ordered the SIT to present its closure report to the relevant Magistrate. The petitioner was then given the opportunity to address any objections she might have to the findings. After receiving a copy of the closure report in 2013, the petitioner filed a petition objecting to it.

The Magistrate rejected Jafri’s petition and upheld the SIT’s closure report. Outraged, the petitioner went to the Gujarat High Court, which, in 2017, upheld the Magistrate’s judgement and dismissed the Jafri petition. Jafri and activist Teesta Setalvad then moved the Supreme Court to overturn the decision to accept the SIT’s clean bill of CHIT. Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, the petitioner’s advocate, asserted at the hearing that the SIT’s probe was biassed and that it did not thoroughly review all of the material at hand. He claimed that the State encouraged the spread of hatred.

Sibal added that the SIT should be investigated into for drawing conclusions that were false. The SIT conducted a “collaborative exercise” rather than a “investigation,” and their investigation was riddled with omissions meant to shield the conspirators. Sibal claimed that there was evidence of a plot in the form of technological documents, including call data records of senior police officers and mobs that identified Muslim homes. He claimed that the Magistrate and High Court also decided to ignore the same, while the SIT completely disregarded everything and made no further inquiries into the matter. Sibal’s allegations that dead bodies were carried around were denied by senior counsel Mukul Rohatgi.

According to the State’s Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, the State “done everything it could.” He had questioned Teesta Setalvad and Citizens for Justice’s trustworthiness, stating that they had embezzled funds intended for the riot victims’ welfare. He claimed that Setalvad was the driving force behind Zakia Jafri, exploiting her predicament to demand action.

Read Judgment

Zakia_Ahsan_Jafri_vs_State_of_Gujarat_and_orsDownload
Tags: 2002 Gujarat RiotsNarendra ModiSpecial Investigation Teamsupreme court of indiaZakia Jafri
ShareTweetSendShare

Related Posts

Sir P.V.R Reddy, IRS Rtd
APERC

APERC’s Landmark Ruling Balancing Regulatory Autonomy and Renewable Energy Goals

May 6, 2025
News

Supreme Court Declines Order for ECI to Release Polling Booth Vote Counts

May 26, 2024
Know More: Sending Demand notices through email or WhatsApp  is valid in cheque dishonor cases: Allahabad High Court
News

Know More: Sending Demand notices through email or WhatsApp is valid in cheque dishonor cases: Allahabad High Court

February 13, 2024
Know More: The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Mumbai has accepted a bankruptcy petition against Dream11.
News

Know More: The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Mumbai has accepted a bankruptcy petition against Dream11.

February 13, 2024
The Supreme Court declines to stay the Madras High Court's ruling dismissing the challenge against Google Play's billing policy.
News

The Supreme Court declines to stay the Madras High Court’s ruling dismissing the challenge against Google Play’s billing policy.

February 12, 2024
election commission, supreme court news, Patna Court News, Clock Election symbol, NCP, Sharad Pawar, Ajit Pawar
News

Know More: Ajit Pawar Election symbol clock for NCP by the Election Commission

February 7, 2024
google news
google news

POPULAR NEWS

La Milano Pizzeria restrained  from representing previous association with La Pino'z - know more

La Milano Pizzeria restrained  from representing previous association with La Pino’z – know more

May 20, 2022
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ADVOCATE AND LAWYER

WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN AN ADVOCATE AND A LAWYER?

June 4, 2022
Know About Registration Of The Partition Document Is Compulsory?

Know About Registration Of The Partition Document Is Compulsory?

January 1, 2024
Justices DY Chandrachud, AS Bopanna, and Bela M. Trivedi,

Execution of Document not to be considered based on Admission of Sign on Document Rules Supreme Court

May 12, 2022
multiple bar association enrollment

Can an Advocate Enroll for Multiple Bar Associations?

May 8, 2022

Tags

advocate Algo Legal Allahabad HC Allahabad High Court Anil Deshmukh anticipatory bail Appointment of Judges bail Bombay high court calcutta high court central government cji Collegium Collegium Recommendations contempt of court defamation delhi high court divorce Enforcement Directorate Gujarat High court Gyanvapi Mosque high court judges IPR Judicial Appointments justice bench karnataka high court kerala high court latest judgements law ministry legal news madras high court murder patna high court pil pocso act public interest litigation rajasthan high court Rouse Avenue Court Sequoia Capital study material supreme court Supreme Court Collegium supreme court of india Union Law Ministry varanasi court

APERC’s Landmark Ruling Balancing Regulatory Autonomy and Renewable Energy Goals

by S Sreedhar
May 6, 2025
0
Sir P.V.R Reddy, IRS Rtd
APERC

Precedent No. JB 2025 APERC OP 91 The APERC Headed by Hon'ble Sir P.V.R. Reddy, Member & Chairman (i/c) in...

Read more

Supreme Court Declines Order for ECI to Release Polling Booth Vote Counts

by S Sreedhar
May 26, 2024
0
News

On Friday, the Supreme Court declined to issue an interim order on a petition from the NGO Association for Democratic...

Read more

Know More: Sending Demand notices through email or WhatsApp is valid in cheque dishonor cases: Allahabad High Court

by S Sreedhar
February 13, 2024
0
Know More: Sending Demand notices through email or WhatsApp  is valid in cheque dishonor cases: Allahabad High Court
News

Is a legal notice sent through WhatsApp or email legal?

Read more

Know More: The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Mumbai has accepted a bankruptcy petition against Dream11.

by S Sreedhar
February 13, 2024
0
Know More: The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Mumbai has accepted a bankruptcy petition against Dream11.
News

National Company Law Tribunal,NCLT Mumbai,Dream 11

Read more

About

Justice Bench is one of the fastest growing news legal portal in India, for latest Latest Legal News india, Supreme Court judgement updates, High Courts Judgments updates,Law Firms News in india, Law School News, Latest Legal News india visit us.

Follow us

Latest Court News

© 2022 JusticeBench  |  Privacy Policy  | Terms of Use

No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • Articles
  • Forums
  • Online Internship
  • Courses
  • Videos

© 2022 JusticeBench  |  Privacy Policy  | Terms of Use

Welcome Back!

Sign In with Google
OR

Login to your account below

Forgotten Password? Sign Up

Create New Account!

Sign Up with Google
OR

Fill the forms below to register

All fields are required. Log In

Retrieve your password

Please enter your username or email address to reset your password.

Log In