SC’s CBI probe order void, CBI falsely implicated me to destabilise Modi:Amit Shah
New Delhi, 17 November, 2011
Doubts have emerged over the credibility of CBI investigation in Sohrabuddin Sheikh fake encounter killing after the agency’s claim that it possessed 200 complaints of extortion against former Gujarat Minister Amit Shah was termed a “bunch of lies” before the Supreme Court on Wednesday.
The agency had roped Shah as an accused in the case on the ground that the former Minister ran an extortion racket. It claimed that a total of 200 complaints in this regard were forwarded to the State Government which failed to act on the same. This fact was also recorded by the CBI in its status reports submitted in sealed cover to the Supreme Court, which is monitoring the case.
Presenting the entire set of complaints before a bench of Justices Aftab Alam and Ranjana Desai, Shah’s counsel senior advocate Ram Jethmalani surprised the bench by suggesting that not one complaint received by the state was against Shah. “Out of the 200 complaints, in 197 Amit Shah is not even mentioned while in three he is mentioned in other capacity.” On a lighter vein, Jethmalani said, “Most complaints related to charges of adultery against police officers while some relate to their service disputes.”
Finding the agency’s case against his client to be frivolous and baseless, Jethmalani thundered, “The agency clearly has other designs. The Centre is out to demolish the State Government which is a thorn in their flesh.” Since the status reports were in sealed cover to which Shah got no access, Jethmalani added, “They (CBI) thought they can make any allegation….It is a case in which CBI officers must be prosecuted and jailed.”
Dissecting the investigation conducted by the agency since January 12, 2010 when the SC transferred the probe from Gujarat Police to CBI, Jethmalani punched several holes into the CBI story to show how compared with the Gujarat Police investigation, CBI too drew a blank.
Jethmalani even did not spare the judge who handed over the case to CBI. He said, “How does a judge who is under investigation of CBI order the same agency to investigate?” He was referring to Justice Tarun Chatterjee, since retired, whose role in the UP provident fund scam was under investigation. “The continuation of judge and his likelihood of arrest was all at stake, for which reason he should have recused (withdrawn) from the case,” the senior counsel said, adding, “It is instances such as these that have prompted many to demand judges to be brought under the Lokpal.” The arguments will continue on Thursday.
|<< Previous Post|