‘Fake encounters’ case: Centre backs Manipur police

The court, which is hearing a PIL seeking a probe into the alleged extra-judicial killings in Manipur, had, on July 14 last year, constituted an SIT of the CBI and ordered filing of FIRs and an investigation.

The AG also questioned the prosecution of personnel from the armed forces and the police for conducting operations in the areas where the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act is in force.

Venugopal said it would be very difficult for the trial judge to go against the observations of the apex court.

Senior counsel Mukul Rohatgi, who appeared for the petitioners, referred to newspaper reports of the July 30 hearing. “If these are the comments of the Supreme Court, it will foreclose my case in trial court… There is apprehension that we are not likely to get justice and the future course of proceedings may be tilted against us,” he said, adding, “it is our case that this court should not hear this matter”.

Justice Lalit said the “murderer” remark was only in the context of a charge under Section 302 (murder) being added to the chargesheet. “What is published in newspapers is not what fell from court,” he said, adding, “I don’t think there is any room for apprehension of this sort”.

The bench said, if needed, it would pass an order that these (comments) were not intended for anything else. Rohatgi, however, said such an order may not serve the purpose of allaying the apprehensions of those who would face investigations. The bench reserved its order on the application seeking its recusal from hearing the matter.

Senior Advocate Colin Gonsalves, who is representing the petitioners in the main case related to the alleged Manipur fake encounters, opposed the plea seeking recusal of the judges, saying it was an “attempt to overawe the court”. He said what the court said that day was that “according to the CBI, there are at least four murderers roaming free in Manipur”.

Advocate Menaka Guruswamy, who is amicus curiae in the matter, said: “It was a hypothetical that was being presented” and “that hypothetical is used to allege bias”.