Godhra riots: SC poser to SIT on Modi and others

The Supreme Court today asked the Special Investigating Committee, headed by former Central Bureau of Investigation director R K Raghavan, to consider whether further probe was required against Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi and 52 others in the complaint filed by Jakia Jafri, widow of former Congress member of Parliament Ehsan Jafri, who was burnt alive in post Godhra riots.

A bench of justices D K Jain, P Sathasivam and Aftab Alam asked the SIT to examine the observations submitted by senior counsel and amicus curiae Raju Ramachandran on the team's report and take appropriate decision on conducting further investigations.

"The SIT inferences and evidence do not match its findings," the bench said while asking the committee to submit its report by April 25, on whether further investigations were required into the complaint. The apex court posted the matter for further hearing to April 27 when it also agreed to list the interim application moved by the Gujarat government, seeking a recall of the apex court's earlier order of April 27, 2007, directing the SIT to look into the complaint against Modi and 52 others.

In May 2010, the SIT had submitted a report to the Supreme Court on its probe into Jakia's complaint, who

had alleged that Modi, top politicians, bureaucrats and police officers had engineered the post-Godhra riots in which her husband was also burnt alive by mobs in Gulbarg Society in Ahmedabad.

Jakia in her complaint alleged that instead of protecting the victims, the chief minister, cabinet ministers and

officials chose to shield or instigate the mobs in the killings. The SIT had earlier questioned Modi, Vishwa Hindu Parishad leader Praveen Togadia and various police officers and examined the records relating to the conduct of various accused and suspects in the list of 53 persons figuring in the complaint.

An estimated 2,000 people were killed in post-Godhra riots in 2002. Besides Jakia's complaint, the SIT is also probing 10 other sensitive cases after the National Human Rights Commission and various non-government organisations termed the investigations to be shoddy and unreliable.