Modi govt gets it again from SC, this time harder

The apex court took umbrage to the state’s ‘‘veiled threat of legal action for changed statements’’ against Zahira Sheikh and its attack on her ‘‘credibility as a witness.’’

In its order written by Justice Pasayat, the bench said this casts doubts on the ‘‘bona fides’’ of the state Government as ‘‘it sounds more like a stand of the defence and not that of the prosecutor.’’

Today’s order laid bare an inherent contradiction in the application for modification of the judgment directing transfer and retrial of the Best Bakery case.

While it claims to have no objection to the case being retried in Gujarat to reconsider Zahira’s desposition, the Modi Government said that she was ‘‘habitual in making different statements at different times’’ and the court should, therefore, not have transferred the case out of Gujarat ‘‘based upon the testimony of such a witness.’’

Justice Pasayat said this gives the impression that ‘‘in the eyes of the state, Zahira is the accused who should be in the dock and not the persons who are made accused in the case.’’

In a scathing observation, the Supreme Court said the fact that the state Government had ‘‘sympathies more for the accused than the victims becomes crystal clear when one looks at the state’s stand that the ramifications of the transfer are serious insofar as the accused are concerned.’’

Describing the modification application as ‘‘an attempt through the backdoor’’ to seek review of the April 12 judgment, Justice Pasayat said the plea was ‘‘false and misleading as the Supreme Court had inherent power to transfer a case in the interest of justice.’’

The court also pulled up the Modi Government for claiming in its application that the issue of transfer outside the state ‘‘was neither raised nor argued by all the parties appearing in the matter.’’

Pasayat pointed out that the same application admitted that the state had ‘‘opposed’’ the arguments for transfer made by Zahira’s counsel, Kapil Sibal.

The bench said this ‘‘really shows the extent of falsehood to which the state has gone and demonstrates the deterioration and falling standards in the preparation and filing of papers in the court.’’

The apex court rejected the state’s plea to expunge the observation made in the April 12 verdict that ‘‘the modern day Neros were looking elsewhere when Best Bakery and innocent children and helpless women were burning.’’

Significantly, the Supreme Court declined to expunge its criticism of the Gujarat High Court for upholding the acquittal of the accused in the Best Bakery case. The April 12 judgment said: ‘‘The High Court appears to have miserably failed to maintain the required judicial balance and sobriety..’’