New Delhi, Aug 29 : The Gujarat government has informed the Supreme Court that there is an overwhelming case against the activist Teesta Setalvad, who was arrested for making up documents in order to implicate high-ranking officials, including the then Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi in the 2002 protests in the state.The report also stated that the investigation is separate from the decision handed down by the apex court on the 24th of June.
In an statement in an affidavit, the state police SIT stated: “There is a strong case against the petitioner in relation to some of the more serious crimes where a criminal conspiracy was planned and the fabrication of false evidence with an intention to obtain the conviction of numerous people for capital punishment.In addition, systematic efforts were put in place to ensure that the oral and other evidence was fabricated.”
“There isn’t any connection between the decision of June 24 2022 (which only confirms the opinion of the High Court of Gujarat, the competent sessions court, and SIT) as well as the ongoing investigation underway in the FIR in the case in question,” it added.
The SIT stated that witnesses have claimed that they were asked to submit pre-typed and pre-affirmed affidavits with the SIT investigating the riots.
“It is claimed that the agency investigating the case has gathered sufficient evidence that proves that the petitioner does has a significant influence on herself, but also through others who protect her for personal interests, but is also identified as having this influence over witnesses from 2002 and onwards,” added the state government’s response.
The Chairman of the SIT stated that such influence can be achieved by means of money, as well as the administration of or threats resorted to.The FIR filed against Setalvad for falsifying evidence isn’t just basing itself on a top judge’s decision but is backed by evidence.
“Investigation that has been conducted to date has revealed irrefutable evidence that can be used to prove the assertions of the FIR that states that the applicant along with other suspects were involved in diverse criminal actions of commission and commission in order to obtain financial, political and other tangible benefits by means of performing the scheme,” the affidavit said.
The SIT said that the evidence of witnesses proved that the plot was carried out by Setalvad together with others at the direction of an influential leader of an political party.”It is claimed that the petitioner held discussions with the politician and received large sums of money.It is claimed that it was made public through the means of the declaration of an eye witness that the funds were not part of any relief-related fund,” the petitioner added.
In the last month in the month of April, earlier this month, the Gujarat High Court had issued an order to the SIT seeking a response to bail applications made by Setalvad and the former Gujarat Director General of Police R.B.Sreekumar.The court will be hearing the case in September.
In her appeal to the apex court Setalvad has raised opposition to a gap of one and half months in the process of hearing of the bail application and argued that bail issues need to be heard quickly.
On June 24 on June 24, the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal made by Zakia Jafri, the wife of Congress head Ehsan Jafri who was killed during the riots in Ahmedabad’s Gulberg Society in 2002, contesting the SIT’s clean chit to the former Gujarat Chief Minister Modi and others in the violence in Gujarat.
A bench comprised of Justice A.M.Khanwilkar (now retired) stated that, in a way, the current proceedings have been ongoing for the past 16 years (from the filing of complaint on June 8th, 2006, which grew into 67 pages and ending through the filing of a 514-page protest complaint that was filed on April 15 2013,) as well as with the courage to question the credibility of every single person who is involved in the act of divulging the devious strategy used.”To keep the pot boiling, clearly it is a deliberate plan.As an issue of fact, everyone involved in this kind of overuse of processmust be in the dock and dealt with in conformity with the law,” said the top court.
ss/vd
