Ahmedabad, 13 February 2012

-Today’s hearing in SIT report case has been over in Ahmedabad Metropolitan court no. 11 of Justice Bhatt.

-Special Investigation Team(SIG) members were present in the court. SIT lawyer Jamowar told media persons that the report was handed over in sealed cover, and even he had not seen the report.

-Today’s proceeding was limited to Teesta Setalvad and Mukul Sinha(left NGO operators)’s pleas demanding certified copies of SIT report and statements of witnesses. In their plea, they had also sought details on what exactly had been submitted to the court. Whether it’s a full report with all material as directed by the SC or not.

-SIT opposed Teesta and Mukul Sinha’s demand to give them copies of SIT report as they are not the main complainants.

-SIT said Jakia Jafri is not a party at this stage. Jakia Jafri had no locus standi until court gives her notice after finding that there is no sufficient evidence or reasonable grounds for proceeding against any person named in the complaint as per the SC order, SIT said.

-SIT sought one month time to submit entire material and thousands of documents. SIT sought proper security and storage while submitting all documents in the court. The documents include the statements of witnesses and other material. SIT has suggested 8 March as a date of submission of all material, however court has not decided on this.

-The court reserved its verdict. Next hearing and verdict on SIT report on 15 February.

-Teesta Setalvad while talking to media persons said that she appreciates that the court has given a date of day after tomorrow, and has not delayed the matter further.

What Supreme Court had said?

“We direct the Chairman, SIT to forward a final report, along with the entire material collected by the SIT, to the Court which had taken cognizance of Crime Report No.67 of 2002, as required under Section 173(2) of the Code.”

“Before submission of its report, it will be open to the SIT to obtain from the Amicus Curiae copies of his reports submitted to this Court.”

“The said Court will deal with the matter in accordance with law relating to the trial of the accused, named in the report/charge-sheet, including matters falling within the 1 (2007) 1 SCC 110 ambit and scope of Section 173(8) of the Code.”

“However, at this juncture, we deem it necessary to emphasise that if for any stated reason the SIT opines in its report, to be submitted in terms of this order, that there is no sufficient evidence or reasonable grounds for proceeding against any person named in the complaint, dated 8th June 2006, before taking a final decision on such `closure’ report, the Court shall issue notice to the complainant and make available to her copies of the statements of the witnesses, other related documents and the investigation report strictly in accordance with law as enunciated by this Court in Bhagwant Singh Vs. Commissioner of Police & Anr.2.”

“For the sake of ready reference, we may note that in the said decision, it has been held that in a case where the Magistrate to whom a report is forwarded under Section 173(2)(i) of the Code, decides not to take cognizance of the offence and to drop the proceedings or takes a view that there is no sufficient ground for proceeding against some of the persons mentioned in the FIR, the Magistrate must give notice to the informant and provide him an opportunity to be heard at the time of consideration of the report.”

🗃️ This story is from our archives and may contain outdated information.