scorecardresearch
Follow Us:
Wednesday, December 01, 2021

Sohrabuddin encounter case: Witness wants to depose again, says his statement against Vanzara not produced by prosecutor

On October 23, 2010, Zala, who owns a petrol pump in Gujarat, had told the court that Gujarat policemen had taken money from him after implicating him in a false case in 2005.

Written by Sadaf Modak | Ahmedabad |
December 19, 2018 1:51:19 am
Sohrabuddin Shaikh, Sohrabuddin Shaikh fake encounter case, Sohrabuddin encounter case witness, Mumbai, India news Under this section, during trial, the court has the power to summon other persons as accused if any evidence appears against them. (Representational)

A WITNESS, who had earlier deposed before the special court in the Sohrabuddin Shaikh alleged fake encounter case, on Tuesday sought to be re-examined in the court, claiming that during his deposition in October, the prosecutor did not produce his statement recorded before a magistrate, naming two Gujarat policemen, who were discharged in the case.

In an application filed before the special court on Tuesday, Gujarat-based businessman Mahendra Singh Zala sought for his statement to be made available to the court as evidence, based on which, the court may consider summoning two discharged policemen — IPS officer D G Vanzara and Gujarat policeman Abhay Chudasama — as accused. Zala’s application, however, comes after the court has concluded proceedings and reserved judgment.

On October 23, 2010, Zala, who owns a petrol pump in Gujarat, had told the court that Gujarat policemen had taken money from him after implicating him in a false case in 2005. The court, however, had not recorded this submission, stating that it did not relate to the present case.

Special Public Prosecutor B P Raju had then asked Zala whether his statement was recorded under Section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code before a magistrate, which has a higher evidence value. While Zala said that it was in 2010, Raju neither showed him the statement nor asked him to identify the document. “At that time, I had asked the public prosecutor to produce my statement recorded under Section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code and give me a copy and have it exhibited. He did not do this,” Zala said.

He added that in his statement recorded in Mumbai in 2010, he made specific allegations against Vanzara and Chudasama. “This evidence would enable the court to have full facts before it and follow up with proceedings under Section 319 of the CrPC,” the application said. Under this section, during trial, the court has the power to summon other persons as accused if any evidence appears against them.

📣 The Indian Express is now on Telegram. Click here to join our channel (@indianexpress) and stay updated with the latest headlines

For all the latest Ahmedabad News, download Indian Express App.

  • Newsguard
  • The Indian Express website has been rated GREEN for its credibility and trustworthiness by Newsguard, a global service that rates news sources for their journalistic standards.
  • Newsguard
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement