SC orders examination of Gujarat riots cases records

The Gujarat riots cases took another unexpected turn today when the Supreme Court directed the examination of the records of the investigation and prosecution of the accused persons by an additional sessions judge of Delhi.

The apex court asked the Delhi High Court chief justice to suggest the name of an additional sessions judge to examine the materials placed by the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) and some non-government organisations making a case for re-investigation and transfer of 13 riots cases outside Gujarat.

Two years ago, the Supreme Court had passed such an order following petitions alleging complicity of the state government in the riots and suppression of evidence.

The 'fast-track' procedure and acquittal of the accused persons prompted the court to order reinvestigation and transfer of the cases then. A similar exercise is being done in a new set of cases.

The SC Bench consisting of Justice K G Balakrishnan, Justice Tarun Chatterjee and Justice D K Jain decided today that an ASJ would examine the voluminous material and give a brief report to it in four weeks. The court would then decide whether to order reinvestigation and transfer of trial in these cases.

The court was hearing various public interest petitions moved by NHRC and Citizens for Justice and Peace seeking transfer of 13 riot cases outside the state because of interference by the government machinery.

The judges declined the plea of senior counsel Harish Salve, appointed to assist them, for placing additional material before the ASJ after senior counsel Mukul Rohtagi for the state government objected to it.

Rohtagi vehemently opposed the plea for reinvestigation and transfer of these cases contending that it cannot be decided by the apex court.

"Do we have only the Supreme Court in the country to decide everything?" Rohtagi asked. He said the petitioner should take recourse to normal judicial process and approach the high court.

However, Salve submitted that these cases were not ordinary ones and needed to be decided by the apex court urgently, particularly because of the delay in the proceedings for more than two years.