AHMEDABAD, NOV 16: Taking cognisance of a technical snag, Justice A K Trivedi of the Gujarat High Court on Wednesday quashed the murder and other charges framed by Additional Sessions Judge Sonia Gokani against former Union Minister of State for Defence Harin Pathak, former state health minister Ashok Bhatt and nine others for the killing of a head constable during the anti-reservation stir in 1985. Pathak and Bhatt had recently resigned from their posts after an outcry over the charges.
The decision came after two of the accused — Ghanshyam Mehta and BJP councillor Mayur Dave — challenged the trial court order on the ground that they were not given a copy of the report of a court commission, as directed by the high court in an earlier order.
The commission was appointed by the high court during the agitation after a resident of Khadia filed a petition alleging police excesses. Headed by Anjani Kumar Thakar, then additional registrar, the commission was visiting Khadia when head constable Lakshman Desai was killed. Pathak, Bhatt and the other accused were charged with killing Desai. The commission submitted its report a few months later.
The high court directed the Additional Sessions Judge to re-frame charges or take any other decision after hearing the accused and the prosecution and ensuring that the accused had received copies of the court commission’s report. The court said the accused were at liberty to make submissions to the trial court about the charges and claim discharge on the basis of papers supplied to them and on grounds permissible under the law.
Government pleader Arun Oza then assured the high court that a copy of the commission’s report would be placed on record with the trial court and given to the accused by November 21.
The high court observed that the trial court had framed charges against the 11 accused without considering the report of the court commission. So, the framing of charges by the trial court was not only “contrary to law” but also in violation of the high court’s order of September 25 this year.
In that order, Justice R M Doshit had directed that the trial judge would order production of the court commission’s report before framing charges. On November 7, the public prosecutor in the trial court had moved an application before the Additional Sessions Judge, seeking time to submit the report. The trial judge asked the public prosecutor to submit the report before the next date of hearing but went on to frame the charges the same day.