The Supreme Court on Thursday asked a Gujarat trial court not to pronounce its final order on the closure report of the Special Investigation Team (SIT) in the 2002 Gulburg Housing Society riot case of Ahmedabad.
“The final order on the closure report would not be pronounced,” a bench of justices D.K. Jain, P. Sathasivam and Aftab Alam said.
The court also issued notice to the Gujarat government and sought its response on the plea of slain Congress leader Ehsan Jafri’s widow seeking documents relating to the SIT probe into the Gulburg Society massacre case.
An Ahmedabad trial court had on November 27 accepted the SIT closure report filed on March 13, 2012 in the case.
In another related development to the post-Godhra riots of 2002, senior advocate Harish Salve, who has been assisting the apex court as an amicus curiae in nine cases, said he would move an application for “relocating” key witnesses and for continuing with their security.
The bench also expressed surprise that Justice G.T. Nanavati Commission, set up by the Gujarat Government to inquire into the riots, has summoned the SIT members and is asking for its report despite the apex court’s order making it clear that the probe panel’s report would be placed only before it.
“Our earlier order is not vague. In fact, we have asked SIT that it will not divulge any information,” the bench said.
The apex court on September 12, 2011 had passed the order relating to supply of documents to Jafri’s widow, Zakia Jafri.
It had also asked the SIT, headed by former CBI Director R.K. Raghavan, which probed the riot cases including the Ahmedabad Gulburg Housing Society massacre case in which former Congress MP Jafri had been killed, to forward its final report to the local court.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
http://twocircles.net/2013jan17/sc_stops_gujarat_court_ruling_gulberg_carnage_closure_report.html

SC stops Gujarat court from ruling on Gulberg carnage closure report

Submitted by admin4 on 17 January 2013 - 7:29pm
By IANS,
New Delhi : The Supreme Court Thursday asked an Ahmedabad court not to pronounce its orders on the closure report filed by the Special Investigation Team (SIT) into the allegations of inaction by Chief Minister Narendra Modi and senior state officials in the Gulberg Society carnage during the 2002 riots.
A bench of Justice D.K. Jain, Justice P.Sathasivam and Justice Aftab Alam passed its order while hearing a petition by Zakia Nasim Jaffri, wife of a former Congress MP killed in the Gulberg Society carnage, that the magistrate's court has not given her all the documents that SIT had relied upon while filing the closure report of its investigation into her complaint.
Jaffri's husband Ehsan Jafri was one of the 69 killed at Gulberg Society. The SIT, headed by CBI's former director R.K. Raghvan, was set up by the apex court to probe the 2002 Gujarat riots cases.
Appearing for Zakia Jaffri, counsel Kamini Jaiswal told the court that the denial of all the documents by the magistrate court that SIT had relied upon for filing its closure report was contrary to the Sep 12, 2011 order of the apex court.
This order of the apex court said that if the SIT's report finds "no sufficient evidence or reasonable grounds" for proceeding against any person named in Jaffri's June 8, 2006 complaint, the court concerned, before taking a final decision on such closure report, "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...".
Jaiswal told the court that the lower court has already closed her client's right to file objections to the closure report. She also said that she could not have filed any objection in the absence of access to documents that SIT had relied upon in filing its closure report.
As Gujarat's Additional Advocate General Tushar Mehta told the court that their right to argue was still there, Jaiswal said: "What will we argue without reports?"
Asking the lower court not to pronounce any order on the closure report, the court also issued notice to Gujarat government on Jaffri's plea seeking access to all the documents that SIT took into consideration before filing the closure report.
Directing the listing of the matter on Feb 7, the court described as "unfortunate" that despite its unequivocal order that several reports of the SIT submitted to it would not be given to anyone, the Nanavati Commission, inquiring into Gujarat riot cases, was threatening Raghvan with action.
"Our concern is that our order is not vague. It is very specific. It is unfortunate that inspite of its being extracted before the commission, they are asking SIT chairman to give the reports," observed Justice Sathasivam.
Taking note of the "threatening letter" received by Raghvan from the commission, Justice Jain asked him if he was apprehending any action.
Noting that SIT report was the property of the apex court and SIT was not at liberty to part with it, Justice Jain said: "This court's order was not confined to a particular case but pertains to entire reports of the SIT."
-------------------------------------


SC stops Gujarat court from ruling on Gulberg carnage closure report

Thursday Jan 17, 2013
StumbleUpon
Tumblr
Digg
Reddit
Email
New Delhi, Jan 17 — The Supreme Court Thursday asked an Ahmedabad court not to pronounce its orders on the closure report filed by the Special Investigation Team (SIT) into the allegations of inaction by Chief Minister Narendra Modi and senior state officials in the Gulberg Society carnage during the 2002 riots.
A bench of Justice D.K. Jain, Justice P.Sathasivam and Justice Aftab Alam passed its order while hearing a petition by Zakia Nasim Jaffri, wife of a former Congress MP killed in the Gulberg Society carnage, that the magistrate's court has not given her all the documents that SIT had relied upon while filing the closure report of its investigation into her complaint.
Jaffri's husband Ehsan Jafri was one of the 69 killed at Gulberg Society. The SIT, headed by CBI's former director R.K. Raghvan, was set up by the apex court to probe the 2002 Gujarat riots cases.
Appearing for Zakia Jaffri, counsel Kamini Jaiswal told the court that the denial of all the documents by the magistrate court that SIT had relied upon for filing its closure report was contrary to the Sep 12, 2011 order of the apex court.
This order of the apex court said that if the SIT's report finds "no sufficient evidence or reasonable grounds" for proceeding against any person named in Jaffri's June 8, 2006 complaint, the court concerned, before taking a final decision on such closure report, "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...".
Jaiswal told the court that the lower court has already closed her client's right to file objections to the closure report. She also said that she could not have filed any objection in the absence of access to documents that SIT had relied upon in filing its closure report.
As Gujarat's Additional Advocate General Tushar Mehta told the court that their right to argue was still there, Jaiswal said: "What will we argue without reports?"
Asking the lower court not to pronounce any order on the closure report, the court also issued notice to Gujarat government on Jaffri's plea seeking access to all the documents that SIT took into consideration before filing the closure report.
Directing the listing of the matter on Feb 7, the court described as "unfortunate" that despite its unequivocal order that several reports of the SIT submitted to it would not be given to anyone, the Nanavati Commission, inquiring into Gujarat riot cases, was threatening Raghvan with action.
"Our concern is that our order is not vague. It is very specific. It is unfortunate that inspite of its being extracted before the commission, they are asking SIT chairman to give the reports," observed Justice Sathasivam.
Taking note of the "threatening letter" received by Raghvan from the commission, Justice Jain asked him if he was apprehending any action.
Noting that SIT report was the property of the apex court and SIT was not at liberty to part with it, Justice Jain said: "This court's order was not confined to a particular case but pertains to entire reports of the SIT."
IANS  This article was distributed through the NewsCred Smartwire.


Read more: http://india.nydailynews.com/politicsarticle/a3f3426e4ff01d672594e5a71f269b1d/sc-stops-gujarat-court-from-ruling-on-gulberg-carnage-closure-report#ixzz2IFASORCD

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2013-03-02/ahmedabad/37389367_1_zakia-jafri-final-report-naroda-patia-massacre-case

Jan Sangharsh Manch moves HC for SIT final report

TNN Mar 2, 2013, 03.49AM IST
AHMEDABAD: A petition has been filed in Gujarat high court by Jan Sangharsh Manch convener and witness in the Naroda Patia massacre case, Amrish Patel. Patel sought directions to the Supreme Court-mandated special investigation team (SIT) to submit its final report on the further investigation conducted in the case.
The trial in the Naroda Patia case ended last year. 32 persons were convicted by the special SIT court. The petition claimed that JSM made an application to the SIT on June 17, 2009, demanding a further probe into the alleged nexus between perpetrators of the 2002 riots and Gujarat police. It demanded a detailed analysis of call records furnished by IPS officer Rahul Sharma.
The SIT had then stated that such a probe was underway. Another similar application was filed in 2010, but the court did not consider it then, due to the fact that the SIT's probe was underway. In 2011, when JSM filed another application, SIT replied that a report was filed in this regard, on the complaint filed by Zakia Jafri. The designated court had asked SIT to submit the final report, on JSM's plea, at the relevant time.
JSM contended before the HC that despite the designated court's order of December 3, 2011, the SIT did not file its report on the further probe. Hence it should be directed to furnish the final report in this regard before the designated court.
The court has scheduled a hearing of this petition on March 12.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------