SIT ignored police inaction: Zakia's lawyer
The lawyer of Zakia Jafri on Friday alleged that the Supreme Court-appointed Special Investigation Team completely ignored the aspect of police inaction during the 2002 post-Godhra riots.Updated: Aug 23, 2013 22:34 IST
The lawyer of Zakia Jafri on Friday alleged that the Supreme Court-appointed Special Investigation Team completely ignored the aspect of police inaction during the 2002 post-Godhra riots.
"SIT has totally failed to probe and disregarded why there was sudden police inaction immediately after the train burning incident at Godhra on February 27, 2002," said advocate Mihir Desai.
He was arguing before Metropolitan Magistrate BJ Ganatra on behalf of Jafri, who has filed a petition against the closure report filed by SIT giving clean chit to Gujarat chief minister Narendra Modi and others. Jafri has accused Modi and others of complicity in conspiracy behind the riots.
"SIT had ample material to suspect this (police's inaction) and still it has not probed whether police did not take action because of some specific instructions from higher government functionaries," Desai said.
There were 36 incidents of communal violence on February 27, 2002 but police did not make a single arrest, he said.
"This clearly shows that role of the state government was very suspicious and criminal negligence on the part of state was clearly visible but still SIT has not probed it," he said.
Earlier, SIT lawyer RS Jamuar strongly objected to some of arguments made by Jafri's lawyer.
Jafri's lawyer had earlier argued if Dawood Ibrahim and Tiger Memon could be booked for conspiracy in the 1993 Mumbai blasts case even though they were not present at the spot of crime, Modi could be booked for conspiracy in riots case on the same lines.
"Such remarks will have far-reaching repercussions. These two (Dawood and Tiger) are anti-nationals whose names can't be mentioned in the present case along with Modi's. They should be withdrawn or SIT will not participate in the hearing," advocate Jamuar said.
However, the magistrate refused to grant this demand.
Hearing will continue on August 27.
First Published: Aug 23, 2013 22:31 IST