Menu

Citizens for Justice and Peace

Annexure D- Panel of Advocates

08, May 2017

Annexure D

(submitted by CJP in the Hon Supreme Court )


Legal
Subversion

Overview

A PANEL OF
ADVOCATES

was constituted to defend the rioters by key members of the Sangh
Parivar on the very night of the Sabarmati Express fire


CHETAN SHAH
,
a VHP member and a leading lawyer of Ahmedabad, was the first to
defend the accused in the Naroda Patiya massacre case. In what became
a pattern of having Sangh sympathizers represent the government in
crucial cases, he was later appointed as public prosecutor in the
Gulbarg society case


DILIP TRIVEDI
,
general secretary of the VHPÂ’s Gujarat unit, is the senior pleader in
Mehsana district, which was among the worst affected areas during the
riots. He has been coordinating riot cases across Gujarat

IN
SABARKANTHA
,
public prosecutor Bharat Bhatt is the VHPÂ’s district president.
He says he has been doing his best to help the accused


ARVIND PANDYA
,
the state governmentÂ’s counsel in the Nanavati-Shah Commission, casts
aspersions on the judges. According to him, Nanavati is after money
and Shah is sympathetic to them

E.         Dilip
Trivedi, A Public Prosecutor from the VHP Cadre, Mehsana District

Questions Raised from
the sting Interview:

a)         He was
responsible for settling 1800 riot related cases all over Gujarat
state.  Settled 1700 riot related cases with conviction in only
12 cases!

b)         In Mehsana
riot related FIR registered 182. Out of which charge sheet presented
in 78 + 2 on later date.76 cases were decided in acquittal of Hindu
rioters / offenders and 2 for conviction : out of it one gets
acquittal from Sessions Court where as the other one have an Appeal
pending before the Hon’ble High Court. Rest 4 are still pending.

c)         Who did he
manage in judiciary to obtain acquittal of Hindu offenders?

d)        Through
which part of state machinery did he manage judiciary in Gujarat
State?

e)         Court
record of Mehsana and rest of the state – for scrutiny & re-trial.

F.         Bharat Bhatt
VHP (Public Prosecutor) Sabarkantha District. He admits in the Sting
that an IPC 436 matter settled by buying witnesses for Rs. 6,50,000/-

a)         There is a
need to scrutinize identity of complainant and witnesses who may have
turned hostile as part of the game.

b)         Bhiloda:
Day light murder by five persons who cut off the victim into pieces.

c)         Did the
Police recover murder weapon – swords in muddamal?

d)        Does the
swords match & identical to the swords used elsewhere in the state or
the swords as part of consignment from Punjab?

e)         Entire
Court record-for scrutiny and re-trial.

f)          Whom did
he pay the money?

G.        Arvind
Pandya – Head of Lawyers panel to defend the Government (& Hindu
youth). Questions Raised by the Sting Operation

a)         Who did call upon him in the early hours of the morning to
handle matters relating to 182, 130 ?

b)         His
questioning pattern of witnesses including police officers before the
Nanavati Shah commission.

c)         Which
witnesses were dropped from examining?

d)        Did the
commission help him in recording the words as per his will?

e)         For the
release if how many Hindu offers he is responsible?

f)          Which and
how many Judges expressed their sympathy with him and provided
guidance when to put up the case and how to put up the case?

g)         Which
cases were put up accordingly?

h)         How could
he manage the judiciary? Who are they?

i)          How could
he manage facility to offenders in the jail?

j)          Which
jails?

k)         Who were
the jailors etc.

l)          Who used
to provide food and other luxury in the jail?

m)       Could other
detainees of the jails testify to the special treatments given to the
riot related offenders?


 

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Go to Top