Sohrabuddin case: Consider trial court deposition as additional evidence, lawyer to HC

The counsel for IPS officer Rajkumar Pandian in Sohrabuddin Sheikh case today urged the Bombay High Court to consider as "additional evidence" the recent deposition by prosecution witnesses before the trial court, wherein, they had turned hostileSenior lawyer Mahesh Jethmalani sought the HC's permission to submit a compilation of the recent deposition by prosecution witnesses.Pandian was discharged by the trial court in the alleged fake encounter cases of Sohrabuddin Sheikh and Tulsiram Prajapati. The HC is hearing revision petitions challenging the discharge of some senior police officials in the case.Such deposition, Jethmalani argued, must be considered by the HC as evidence that went in Pandian's favour.Earlier this week, referring to the increasing number of prosecution witnesses in the case retracting their initial testimonies and turning hostile, the HC had said that it could not be affected by what was currently going on in the case before the trial court.Justice AM Badar had said that the High Court was merely considering whether or not charges could have been framed against these officials. Therefore, how could the HC, that was at the stage of charges, consider evidence from the trial, he had asked.Justice Badar is hearing a bunch of revision petitions filed by Sohrabuddin Sheikh's brother Rubabuddin and the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) challenging the discharge of some senior police officials in the case.However, Jethmalani argued today that the new testimonies of the witnesses, in which they had retracted their previous statements made against some senior IPS officers, including Pandian, must be considered by HC as "additional evidence" that "fortified" their discharge.While Justice Badar permitted him to submit such a compilation, he added that Jethmalani would have to satisfy the court on the point of law on whether the High Court could view such evidence."These revision applications before us (HC) are of a pre-trial stage where all I need to see is whether or not charges could have been framed against these officials. Therefore, we are at the stage of charges, so how can we consider evidence from the trial?" Justice Badar asked.Jethmalani, however, argued that since section 391 of the Criminal Procedure Code permitted HC to call for additional evidence, Justice Badar could view the new testimonies as evidence in favour of the concerned officials.He also alleged that his client, Pandian, had been falsely implicated in the case by the CBI."The CBI's probe was malafide. The premier probe agency in the case has a history of working on a premeditated mandate. For instance, in the Ishrat Jahan case, the CBI locked horns with the Intelligence Bureau. So, it is not hard to believe that it fabricated evidence in the present case," Jethmalani said.Sheikh, a gangster with alleged terror links, and his wife Kausar Bi were killed in a suspected fake encounter by the Gujarat police in November 2005.Tulsiram Prajapati was killed in another alleged fake encounter by the Gujarat and Rajasthan police in December 2006.Of the 38 persons named by the CBI as accused, 15, including senior IPS officers D G Vanzara, Pandian, Dinesh MN, and BJP president Amit Shah, were discharged by the CBI court in Mumbai between August 2016 and September 2017.

Sohrabuddin case: Consider trial court deposition as additional evidence, lawyer to HC

Also Read

Ishrat Jahan case: Special CBI court sets aside summonses to 2 IB officers

Discharge orders in Sohrabuddin case alarming: ex- judge

Ishrat Jahan case: Ex-IPS officer D G Vanzara seeks discharge

Sohrabuddin case: HC says it cannot be 'affected' by what is happening in trial court

SC trashes plea for SIT probe into Judge Loya's death

Explore News