Sunday, August 14, 2022
HomeTrending Stories EnglishGujarat Ex Prime Cop Arrested A Day After Court docket Ruling On...

Gujarat Ex Prime Cop Arrested A Day After Court docket Ruling On 2002 Riots

R B Sreekumar instituted false proceedings in opposition to harmless folks, learn the criticism.


A day after the Supreme Court docket upheld the all clear given by a Particular Investigation Crew (SIT) to Prime Minister Narendra Modi within the 2002 riots instances, the Gujarat police on Saturday arrested former Director Basic of Police R B Sreekumar and took in custody social activist Teesta Setalvad for allegedly conspiring to falsely implicate harmless individuals.

The First Data Report (FIR), based mostly on a criticism filed by an Ahmedabad crime department official, additionally named former Indian Police Service (IPS) officer Sanjiv Bhatt, who’s already in jail in one other case.

Teesta Setalvad, who was picked up from her Mumbai residence, claimed her arrest was unlawful and apprehended menace to her life.

She will probably be arrested as soon as she is delivered to Ahmedabad, police sources mentioned.

Sanjiv Bhatt is sentenced to life imprisonment in a custodial demise case, and in one other case he’s accused of planting contraband to border a lawyer in a false case.

Teesta Setalvad was detained from her home within the Juhu space of Mumbai and later taken to Santacruz police station for informing the native police about her detention, sources mentioned.

“She has been taken by the Gujarat Anti-Terrorist Squad….we weren’t knowledgeable prematurely concerning the case. They barged into the home and assaulted her earlier than taking her with them,” alleged her lawyer Vijay Hiremath.

However a neighborhood police official denied that Teesta Setalvad was assaulted.

Teesta Setalvad, Sanjiv Bhatt and R B Sreekumar “conspired to abuse the method of legislation by fabricating false proof to make a number of individuals to be convicted in an offence that’s punishable with capital punishment,” mentioned the criticism filed by inspector D B Barad of Ahmedabad crime department.

They instituted “false and malicious legal proceedings in opposition to harmless folks with intention to trigger damage to a number of individuals, and ready false information and dishonestly used these information as real with the intention to trigger injury and damage to many individuals,” as per the criticism.

The criticism drew on varied submissions made earlier than the Particular Investigation Crew (SIT) fashioned by the Supreme Court docket to research the 2002 Gujarat riots instances and submissions made by the accused earlier than the Justice Nanavati-Shah Fee of Inquiry.

The FIR was registered earlier within the day beneath sections 468, 471 (forgery), 194 (giving or fabricating false proof with intent to acquire conviction of capital offence), 211 (institute legal proceedings to trigger damage), 218 (public servant framing incorrect file or writing with intent to avoid wasting individual from punishment or property from forfeiture), and 120 (B) (legal conspiracy) of the Indian Penal Code.

“Teesta Setalvad conjured, concocted, solid, fabricated information and paperwork and/or proof together with fabrication of paperwork by individuals who had been protecting witnesses of the complainant, Zakia Jafri,” as per the criticism.

Teesta Setalvad and her Non-Governmental Group had been co-petitioner swith Zakia Jafri within the petition filed in opposition to then chief minister Narendra Modi and others within the Supreme Court docket. The courtroom dismissed the petition on Friday and upheld the clear chit given to Prime Minister Narendra Modi and others.

The criticism additionally accused Teesta Setalvad of influencing and tutoring witnesses and making them depose on pre-typed affidavits. Even Zakia Jafri was tutored by Teesta Setalvad, as was clear from her assertion earlier than the Nanavati Fee on August 22, 2003, it mentioned.

IPS officers Sanjiv Bhatt and R B Sreekumar — who was further director common of police (DGP) of Armed Unit through the 2002 Godhra riot, and intelligence DGP quickly after — had made a number of depositions earlier than the Nanavati Fee of Inquiry that had been in opposition to the Gujarat authorities, the criticism mentioned.

Sanjiv Bhatt allegedly solid varied paperwork mailed to the SIT and likewise falsely claimed he attended a late evening assembly on February 27, 2002, known as by the then Chief Minister Narendra Modi at his residence, it mentioned.

R B Sreekumar’s 9 affidavits earlier than the Nanavati-Shah Fee had been the supply of most of the allegations in Zakia Jafri’s petition, it claimed.

In its judgment handed on Friday, the Supreme Court docket had noticed that “On the finish of the day, it seems to us {that a} coalesced effort of the disgruntled officers of the State of Gujarat together with others was to create sensation by making revelations which had been false to their very own information.

“The falsity of their claims had been totally uncovered by the SIT after a radical investigation … As a matter of reality, all these concerned in such abuse of course of, should be within the dock and proceed in accordance with legislation,” the courtroom order mentioned.

In its judgment, the highest courtroom had additionally famous the objections raised by the respondents on Teesta Setalvad becoming a member of as petitioner quantity two within the plea after Zakia Jafri. The respondents objected on the grounds of Teesta Setalvad’s “antecedents” and likewise for her “ulterior design by exploiting the feelings and sentiments of appellant–Zakia Jafri, the actual sufferer of the circumstances.” Nevertheless, no direct function of Teesta Setalvad was talked about within the courtroom verdict.

Zakia Jafri’s husband and former Congress Member of Parliament Ehsan Jafri was killed through the riots.

A police officer in Mumbai mentioned Teesta Setalvad handed a written criticism to Santa Cruz police station, and “they’re processing it.” Teesta Setalvad’s criticism alleged that Gujarat police “barged into” her compound, didn’t present her a duplicate of the FIR or warrant in opposition to her, and there was a “massive bruise” on her left hand.

“I worry severely for my life,” her criticism added.


Most Popular