SC Appoints Amrendra Sharan As Amicus On A Plea Seeking Re-probe Into Gandhi’s Assassination [Read Petition]

The Supreme Court on Friday appointed senior advocate Amrendra  Sharan as amicus to assist the court on a petition challenging Bombay High Court Judgment by which the High Court dismissed the prayer seeking reinvestigation into assassination of Mahatma Gandhi in the light of some new evidence.

High Court dismissed his PIL holding that it was not in a position to entertain this Petition   firstly   because   finding   of   fact   has   been   recorded   by   the competent Court and which finding has been confirmed right up to the Apex   Court.     Secondly,   so   far   as   the   observation   made   by   the Commission is concerned, the said order was passed in 1969 and the present Petition has been filed almost after 46 years.

A bench headed by Justice SA Bobde was initially of the view that "at this stage, nothing can be done in law in the case which was decided long ago”.

“We want to go by the law and not by political passion. You say that there was someone else, a third person who killed him (Gandhi). Is that person alive today to face the trial,” the bench asked.

However, later it asked former Additional Solicitor General Sharan to look into the petition and look into “whether materials produced by petitioner are relevant and it is wise to re-open the case at this stage under the law”.

Petitioner Pankaj Kumur Chandra Phadnis argued that an organisation was behind the killing of the Father of the Nation and claimed he had documents to substantiate his claim.

The bench asked him whether besides the two persons who were convicted, there was any other human being alive involved in this case.

The bench however, observed that “the court can’t convict an organisation for murder of a person” and posted the matter till October 30.

In his plea, the petitioner sought to ascertain the veracity of the finding of the trial court and the High Court of Punjab that three bullets were fired by Godse from the gun where as the material facts on record show that four bullets were fired and also to ascertain the correctness of several observations made by the Kapur Commission, which were again contrary to the evidence available on record.

He also sought expunging of certain remarks derogatory to Marathi people in general and Veer Savarkar in particular by the Kapur Commission report and also sought the constitution of a new commission of inquiry to investigate the larger conspiracy behind the murder of Mahatma Gandhi.

Questions raised

1. Whether the Hon’ble High Court has committed an error apparent on record by holding that the finding of facts in the Mahatma Gandhi murder case were confirmed right up to the Apex Court? It is a matter of fact that the Apex Court of India i.e. The Supreme Court of India was established on 26.01.1950 while Nathuram Godse was hanged on 15.11.1949?


2. Whether the Hon’ble High Court has erred in rejecting the petitioner‟s request to constitute a new Commission of Inquiry to bring out the truth behind the murder of Mahatma Gandhi on the ground that the petition has been filed after 46 years even when the Petitioner in his knowledge has filed this petition without undue delay and when the Petitioner in his written submission brought out the serious lacunae in the Kapur Commission‟s report such as factual errors, obsolete approach, non-application of mind to available evidence etc?


3. Whether the Hon’ble High Court has erred in rejecting the petition involving an issue of national importance to constitute a new Commission of Inquiry to bring out the truth behind the real hands involved in the murder of a person like the Mahatma solely on the ground of filing it after 46 years of submission of Kapur Commission’s report?


4. Whether the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay erred in dismissing PIL No. 32 of 2016 summarily without even adverting to the voluminous evidence and material new facts produced by the Petitioner that he through his research and efforts procured for the past two decades and which were not available either to the Courts of Law that adjudicated the matter of the murder of Mahatma Gandhi or later to the Kapur Commission that examined various aspects of the murder of Mahatma Gandhi and submitted its report to the Government of India on 30.09.1969?