Sohrabuddin: Where Gujarat Police erred

The Supreme Court,while directing the CBI to investigate the Sohrabuddin fake encounter on Tuesday,blew holes in the investigation by the Gujarat Police into the case....

The Supreme Court,while directing the CBI to investigate the Sohrabuddin fake encounter on Tuesday,blew holes in the investigation by the Gujarat Police into the case. It pulled up the state police for a faulty probe in the case,in which 13 Gujarat policemen including top cop D K Vanzara are behind bars for their roles.

Following are the key observations of the court in its order,pointing out how the Gujarat Police erred in its investigation.

* Although the chargesheet was submitted,considering the nature of crime allegedly committed not by any third party but by the police personnel of Gujarat,the investigation concluded in the case cannot be said to be satisfactorily held.

Story continues below this ad

* The chargesheet as well as the eight ATRs failed to investigate what was the motive of the killings. The motive of conspiracy cannot be as attributed name,fame and promotion in case of Sohrabuddins death.

* Geetha Johri failed to investigate the case properly as IG-CID (Crime) and also she mentioned the criminal background of Sohrabuddin as did the accused police to obfuscate the inquiry.

* CID (Crime) failed to carry out impartial probe as there are factual discrepancies in the eight Action Taken Reports submitted to SC and the chargesheet filed in chief metropolitan magistrates court.

* The FIR dated November 26,2005 was a fabricated one and it could not have formed the basis of the real investigation to find the truth.

Story continues below this ad

* The call records had not been analyzed properly,particularly the call data relating to three senior police officers either in relation to Sohrabbuddins case or in lone witness Tulsiram Prajapatis case,in addition to Kausarbis.

* CID (Crime) made a false excuse for not conducting the narco-analysis of the accused because a judgment of this court is pending on the matter,though the sessions judge had permitted the test.

* The chargesheet submitted in Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Court doesnt identify the Andhra police personnel even when it stated that Sohrabbuddin and two others were picked up by Gujarat Police personnel,accompanied by seven Hyderabad Police personnel.

* The chargesheet identifies the third person with Sohrabuddin and his wife taken to Disha farm where they were kept before their killing as Kalimuddin,but has no details of what happened to him. It cannot be ruled out that the third person could be Prajapati who was later killed in an encounter by Gujarat police. Facts surrounding his death evoke strong suspicion.

Story continues below this ad

* No justification can be found for investigating officer Johri to walk out of the investigation in case of Prajapatis death without informing SC.

* The eight ATRs filed by CID(Crime) dont make it clear what happened to Kausarbi,nor is the mode of killing stated,though it admitted that she was seen in the company of the ATS personnel on November 26,2005 and her body was taken for cremation on November 29,2005.

* From the chargesheet,it appears that the third person present with Sohrabuddin and Kausarbi was sent somewhere. It appears that the literal translation of the chargesheet in Gujarati would mean he was anyhow made to disappear.