Zakia can’t have Malhotra’s report: Court
Setalvad’s Plea To Inspect Original Report Also Denied
Zakia Jafri will not get a copy of the preliminary report, filed by
member of the Supreme Court-appointed SIT A K Malhotra, in 2010, with
regard to her complaint implicating chief minister Narendra Modi and
others in the 2002 riots.
On Monday a magisterial court rejected
an application filed by the widow of former Congress MP Ehsan Jafri
which sought directions to the SIT to furnish vital documents that were
not supplied to her along with the closure report copy.
Beside Malhotra’s report,
Zakia had also sought copies of the commentary by SIT chairman R K
Raghavan which were submitted to the SC in a sealed cover.
The court has declined this plea.
In
doing so, the court made clear distinction between inquiry and
investigation, and said, “This court cannot order for documents which
the investigating officer of this case has not collected or taken in his
custody during the course of investigation.”
SIT had argued that the investigation
was conducted by IPS officer Himanshu Shukla, and all documents
collected by him during the probe have been submitted before the court.
Zakia
was insisting on a copy of Malhotra’s report arguing that there was a
change in SIT’s view on her complaint since then, and the complainant
should be made aware about the evidence that led the probe agency to
change its stand.
The court has also rejected Zakia’s demand for documents related to other post-Godhra massacres like Naroda Patia.
The SIT has, however, been directed to supply Zakia another copy of those documents that are illegible.
While
turning down Zakia’s plea, metropolitan magistrate B J Ganatra also
declined social activist Teesta Setalvad’s request to inspect the 22,000-page original report submitted in the court.
“If
applicant is appearing party-in-person, he or she can be allowed to be
represented by a close friend. But in this case, the original
complainant (Zakia) is represented by her lawyers and she is
participating in court procedures through them. In this situation, when
she is being assisted by her advocates, it’s understood that she is
capable of any kind of submissions related to the case,” the court
observed and upheld the SIT’s contention that Setalvad should not be
permitted to touch the report. She had sought permission from the court
to inspect the report on basis of a power of attorney from Zakia.
Moreover,
the court has asked SIT to file an affidavit by July 21 showing a list
of documents featuring in the report, that were not collected during the
course of investigation.