Supreme Court - Daily Orders
National Human Rights Commission vs State Of Gujarat on 22 August, 2017
Bench: Chief Justice, A.M. Khanwilkar, D.Y. Chandrachud
1
ITEM NO.1 COURT NO.1 SECTION PIL-W
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Writ Petition(s)(Criminal) No(s). 109/2003
NATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS. Respondent(s)
(NAME OF MR. HARISH N. SALVE, SR. ADVOCATE (A.C.) AND MR. BHARGAVA
V. DESAI (A.C.) MAY BE TREATED TO HAVE BEEN SHOWN IN LIST.)
WITH
T.P.(Crl.) No. 66-72/2004 (XVI -A)
T.P.(Crl.) No. 43/2004 (XVI -A)
SLP(C) No. 7951/2002 (III)
W.P.(Crl.) No. 37-52/2002 (PIL-W)
SLP(Crl) No. 2833/2015 (II-B)
T.P.(Crl.) No. 194-202/2003 (XVI -A)
W.P.(Crl.) No. 118/2003 (X)
W.P.(Crl.) D 17953/2003 (PIL-W)
SLP(Crl) No. 4409/2003 (II-B)
(FOR STAY APPLICATION ON IA 11537/2003)
W.P.(Crl.) No. 216/2003 (X)
W.P.(Crl.) No. 284/2003 (X)
Date : 22-08-2017 These petitions were called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.M. KHANWILKAR
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE D.Y. CHANDRACHUD
Amicus Curiae Mr. Harish N. Salve,Sr.Adv.
Mr. Bhargava V. Desai,Adv.
For the appearing parties :
UOI Ms. Pinky Anand,ASG
Mr. K. Radhakrishnan, Sr. Adv.
Ms. Ranjana Narayan,Adv.
Mr. R. Bala, Adv.
Mr. B. Krishna Prasad,Adv.
Signature Not Verified
Mr. S.W.A. Qadri,Adv.
Ms. Saudamini Sharma,Adv.
Digitally signed by
PARVEEN KUMAR
Date: 2017.08.23
17:39:34 IST
Reason:
State of AP Mr. Guntur Prabhakar,Adv.
Ms. Prerna Singh,Adv.
2
State of Arunachal Mr. Anil Shrivastav,Adv.
Pradesh Mr. Rituraj Biswas,Adv.
State of Assam Ms. Diksha Rai,Adv.
State of Bihar Mr. Gopal Singh,Adv.
Mr. Manish Kumar, Adv.
State of Mr. C.D. Singh,AAG
Chhattisgarh Ms. Sakshi Kakkar,Adv.
State of Gujarat Mr. Tushar Mehta, ASG
Ms. Hemantika Wahi,Adv.
Mr. Devang Vyas,Adv.
State of Haryana Mr. Anil Grover, AAG
Mr. Satish Kapoor, Adv.
Mr. B.S. Gautam, Adv.
Mr. Sanjay Kumar Visen,Adv.
State of HP Mr. D.K. Thakur,Adv.
Mr. Varinder Kumar Sharma,Adv.
Ms. Parul Sharma,Adv.
State of Jharkhand Mr. Jayesh Gaurav, Adv.
Mr. Gopal Prasad,Adv.
State of Karnataka Mr. V.N. Raghupathy,Adv.
Mr. Parikshit P. Angadi,Adv.
Mr. Lagnesh Mishra,Adv.
Mr. Prakash Jadhav,Adv.
State of Kerala Mr. C.K. Sasi,Adv.
State of Mr. Nishant R. Katneshwarkar,Adv.
Maharashtra
State of Manipur Mr. Sapam Biswajit Meitei,Adv.
Mr. Ashok Kumar Singh,Adv.
State of Meghalaya Mr. Ranjan Mukherjee,Adv.
Mr. Subhro Sanyal,Adv.
State of Orissa Mr. Sibo Sankar Mishra,Adv.
Mr. Uma Kant Mishra,Adv.
Mr. Niranjan Sahu,Adv.
State of Punjab Mr. Kuldip Singh,Adv.
Ms. Jaspreet Gogia, Adv.
State of Rajasthan Ms. Ruchi Kohli,Adv.
3
State of Sikkim Ms. Aruna Mathur,Adv.
Mr. Avneesh Arputham,Adv.
Ms. Anuradha Arputham,Adv.
Mr. Amit Arora,Adv.
Ms. Simran Jeet, Adv.
For M/s. Arputham, Aruna & Co.
State of Telangana Mr. S.U.K. Sagar,Adv.
Mr. Mrityunjai Singh,Adv.
State of Tripura Mr. Gopal Singh,Adv.
Mr. Rituraj Biswas,Adv.
State of UP Mr. D.K. Singh, AAG
Mr. Upendra Mishra, Adv.
Mr. Vinay Garg, AOR
State of WB Ms. Nandini Sen,Adv.
Mr. Chanchal Kumar Ganguli,Adv.
UT of Andaman & Mr. K.V. Jagdishvaran,Adv.
Nicobar Admn. Ms. G. Indira,Adv.
Govt.of Puducherry Mr. V.G. Pragasam,Adv.
Mr. S. Prabu Ramasubramanian,Adv.
Mr. Menu Sundaram, Adv.
Ms. Aparna Bhat,Adv.
Ms. Joshita Pai,Adv.
Ms. Shobha, Adv.
Ms. Joyshree Barman, Adv.
Dr. Meera Agarwal, Adv.
Mr. Ramesh Chandra Mishra, Adv.
Mr. Shakil Ahmed Syed, Adv.
Mr. Parvez Dabas, Adv.
Mr. Milan Laskar, Adv.
Mr. Edward Belho, Adv.
Ms. K. Enatoli Sema, Adv.
Mr. Amit Kumar Singh, Adv.
Mr. K. Luikang Michael, Adv.
Mr. Z.H. Isaac Haiding, Adv.
Mrs. Kirti Renu Mishra,AOR
Mr. Dharmendra Kumar Sinha,AOR
Mr. Rana Ranjit Singh,AOR
Mr. G. Prakash,AOR
Dr. Nafis A. Siddiqui,AOR
Ms. Liz Mathew,AOR
4
Mr. R. Sathish,AOR
Mr. P.V. Dinesh,AOR
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
1. Only two of the nine matters in question remain pending for consideration, firstly, Meghani Nagar PS 67/2002 (Gulberg Society). Insofar as the instant matter is concerned, trial in respect of 60 persons has been concluded, out of which 24 have been convicted and 36 have been acquitted. However, the trial is still in progress in connection with four juvenile accused, before the Juvenile Court. It is submitted, that the matter was last considered by the trial Court on 18.07.2017. Since the issue has been pending consideration with reference to an incident, which took place about fifteen years ago, we consider it just and appropriate to require the concerned Juvenile Court, to expedite the disposal of the matter, especially with reference to the recording of evidence, on a day to day basis(if possible), and to conclude the same at the earliest. We therefore request Shri A.K. Malhotra, Member, Special Investigation Team, Gandhinagar (Gujarat), to place this order, before the concerned Juvenile Court seeking expeditious disposal of the above trial.
2. The second matter, wherein trial is still in progress pertains to Naroda PS 98/2002 (Naroda Gaon Case). We are informed, that prosecution evidence in the above case has been completed, and that defence evidence is being recorded. For the same reasons, as have been recorded in the preceding paragraph, we require the trial Court to complete the recording of evidence of the remaining 5 defence witnesses, within the outer limit of two months. The defence, may be required to produce the remaining witnesses, within one month from today, and in case the remaining witnesses cannot be produced for the reason that one or more of them are not located within the territorial jurisdiction of the concerned Court (we are informed, that one of the witnesses is abroad), their evidence may be recorded by way of video conferencing, by following the parameters laid down by this Court in Sujoy Mitra versus State of West Bengal (2015) 16 SCC 615. Under all circumstances, we hope and expect that the trial Court shall render its judgment in the instant second matter, within four months from today. As in the first case, Shri A.K. Malhotra, Member, Special Investigation Team, Gandhinagar (Gujarat) is requested to place the instant order before the concerned trial Court.
3. List again after four months.
Subject: Writ Petition(Criminal) No. 118/2003
1. Learned counsel for the petitioner informs us, that this Court had directed the CBI to take over investigation in 9 cases, on 16.12.2003. The CBI completed the investigation and thereafter filed charge sheet against 20 persons including 6 police personnel and 2 doctors on 19.4.2004, in the instant case. It has been pointed out, that the trial Court convicted 13 of the accused, whereupon, appeals were preferred before the High Court, which confirmed the convictions, and also, accepted the appeal preferred by the CBI and additionally convicted accused numbers 13 to 16 and 18 to 20. It is submitted, that the limited prayer that remains in the instant petition, pertains to compensation to the family 6 members of the deceased and other victims, as also, departmental action against police personnel, who did not carry out the investigation appropriately.
2. In view of the above, we consider it just and appropriate to de-tag the instant petition from the remaining matters. Ordered accordingly.
3. Post for hearing after eight weeks.
(PARVEEN KUMAR) (RENUKA SADANA) AR CUM PS ASST.REGISTRAR