Gujarat ‘twists’ facts to stall Best re-trial

The application will come up shortly before a bench comprising Justice Doraiswamy Raju and Justice Arijit Pasayat, which had delivered the verdict transferring the matter to Maharashtra.

The application flies in the face of Sheikh’s special leave petition:

• Zaheera’s SLP filed in January specifically prays at the end that ‘‘the re-trial including leading of completely fresh evidence be done at a sessions court outside Gujarat.’’

• The bulk of the SLP is dedicated to various arguments and illustrations to show that ‘‘for a fair and transparent trial to take place and for meeting the ends of justice, it is essential that the trial in the Best Bakery case be shifted outside Gujarat.’’

• Sheikh and other witnesses who turned hostile have categorically stated that they were forced to lie on oath due to threats from persons who are ‘‘politically well-connected and despite wide publicity to this fact, no action or even promise of action has come forth from the State Government against these persons.’’

It was on account of such material given by Sheikh that the April 12 verdict delivered by Justice Pasayat concluded as follows: ‘‘Keeping in view the peculiar circumstances of the case, and the ample evidence on record, glaringly demonstrating subversion of justice delivery system with no congenial and conducive atmosphere still prevailing, we direct that the re-trial shall be done by a court under the jurisdiction of Bombay High Court.’’

The Gujarat Government’s modification application in the Best Bakery case came to light today in the context of the larger NHRC case seeking the transfer of other key riot cases such as Gulberg Society and Naroda Patiya.

Its counsel, additional solicitor general Mukul Rohtagi, disclosed to a bench headed by Chief Justice V N Khare that the state had filed the application on Monday.

Rohtagi said that while the Gujarat Government, too, had sought a retrial of the Best Bakery case, it questioned the apex court’s decision to have it outside the state saying that such a prayer had not been made even in Sheikh’s appeal and as such not at all argued upon by the parties.

According to Rohtagi, the issue of transferring the matter out of Gujarat had been mentioned in passing by Sheikh’s counsel, Kapil Sibal, while he was wrapping up his arguments on her appeal.

The modification application also requested the court to withdraw its remark that state authorities had behaved as ‘‘modern day Neros’’ who looked elsewhere when innocent children and helpless women were being burnt.

Incidentally, the bench headed by Chief Justice Khare dealt with the Gujarat riot cases for the last time today as he is due to retire on May 2. Since some of the accused persons in the various cases sought to be transferred are yet to receive notices from the apex court, Khare’s bench could do nothing more than passing a direction to ensure the compliance of that requirement.

On the suggestion of amicus curiae Harish Salve, Justice Khare asked the Gujarat police to insert public notices in local newspapers on two consecutive days inviting the accused to collect their copies of the transfer petition within six weeks.

The NHRC matter will come up next on August 3 before a bench headed by Justice Ruma Pal.