SC pulls up Gujarat for lapses in '02 riot cases

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Wednesday pulled up the Gujarat government over the ’02 riot cases, saying that it would not allow the derailment of the criminal justice administration system relating to the riots.

The criminal justice procedure has been forgotten by the state machinery in such cases, the apex court sharply observed, while disagreeing with the plea that taking up these cases would set a new precedent in the criminal justice system.

“The police cannot do whatever they like under the protection provided by the Criminal Procedure Code,” said a three-judge Bench hearing 14 Gujarat riot related cases. The Bench said that the court is not powerless in stepping into such cases.

The court asked the state machinery, “Do you mean to say that the court is powerless where the chargesheets were not filed properly, the procedures of the Criminal Procedure Code were forgotten, post-mortem not properly done, bodies were buried and doctors gave false evidence?”

Asking the amicus in the case, senior counsel Harish Salve, to submit a report on each such case and the suggestions and issues to be decided, the bench posted the case for further hearing on February 20. The state through its counsel Sourav Kirpal tried to argue that in these cases the investigation is complete and chargesheets have been filled.

The state, in its application seeking the dismissal of such petitions said that criminal litigation is exclusively an issue between the prosecution and the accused and a third party has no right to interfere by way of a Public Interest Litigation (PIL).

There can be no monitoring after the chargesheet is filed, submitted the state in its application citing a judgement of the apex court. In the Rajiv Ranjan Singh vs Union of India case, the court has held that a PIL is totally alien to pending criminal proceedings, the application said.

The National Human Rights Commission had moved the PIL and sought the transfer of trial of such cases outside the state. Senior counsel KTS Tulsi appearing for some of the accused said that the court cannot bypass the criminal justice procedure. His contention was that these are matters for the trial court to decide. And if the victims were not satisfied with the investigation, they have to file an application before the trial court.

“We cannot invent a new procedure. The trial has to proceed in accordance with the law and the procedure of the Criminal Procedure Code,” Mr Tulsi said.

He added that the established course should be followed in the cases: “It was because of the intervention of this court that the trial has been delayed for three years.”

Three years ago, on November 21, ’03, the apex court had stayed the trail in 14 major cases related to the Gujarat riots after allegations of an unfair investigation and deposition of the witnesses in the cases.

Mr Salve told the Bench that in such a situation the rights of victims cannot be ignored. “The theory of prosecution versus accused is old. In international jurisprudence, victims right has been brought at par with that of the accused,” he said adding that it all depends upon the facts of each case. “No situation is worse than a fear that one will not get fair justice,” he said.

Salve also said that the two larger issues of witness protection and fair trial in such cases have to be decided. Replying to a query of the bench about the status of the cases, Salve said “There was a huge difference between what the state is saying and what the victims are saying.

There is a wide gap in the accounts of the state and those affected by large-scale violence. The minority community is saying it is systematically being pushed into a corner,” he added.

The court is looking into whether 14 major Gujarat riots related cases should be handed over to an independent investigating agency or transferred out of the state.