Gujarat Riots : Mukul Rohatgi Defends SIT Clean Chit To Narendra Modi - Live Updates From Zakia Jafri's Case In Supreme Court Hearing

Bench: Court kept a distinction between further investigation and enquire into. It is a midway

Rohatgi: These officers went much much beyond looking into.

Bench: So, it is not direction of further investigation as such.

Rohatgi: Otherwise they would have said file FIR or have specified as such.

Rohatgi: Police can say they have some new material in the form of statement maybe. The importance of order couched into an important manner by using closure and look into in inverted commas and indicating that it is further material in Gulberg case.

Rohatgi: So, in some cases, not in those 9. One is best bakery, bilkis bano where trial was shifted to Mumbai. in fact retrial happened in Mumbai. 173 has been used correctly. A report of further investigation has to be present under 173(2) itself. The police is empowered.

Rohatgi: Some material comes to the knowledge of the police during the trial they are to inform the court. Kindly turn to 173, report of Police officer after investigation.

Bench: 173(8) also refers to 173(2).

Bench: Read para 15 also. No further monitoring required.

Rohatgi: When investigation is complete and chargesheet is filed then it is with the trial court.

Bench: Normally.

Rohatgi: These were unique cases, not run of the mill cases.

Rohatgi: [In the SC order] Mark, the word closure in closure report is in inverted commas. It means it is a closure without recording an FIR. This was the import.

Bench: The process followed is not strictly as per CrPC. It is instructions given under 226. 

Bench: This order is a reiteration of the order dated 27.04.2009.

Rohatgi: Your lordship is correct. [Court said]You give your report to the court which took cognisance of Gulberg. To be added to the trial that was ongoing. 

Rohatgi: Here Teesta Setalvad joined her. Kindly mark the court here is conscious, says ‘look into’.

Rohatgi: [Reading from the SC order]Kindly note your lordship that if we were hiding something, Malhotra would not have ordered further investigation against a Cabinet minister. 

Rohatgi: The next order of SC dated 12.09.2011. By this time Malhotra and Shukla had done their jobs and filed reports before the SC. 

Rohatgi: Next document is 228, this is the SC order qua the complainant..The SIT shall look into the matter and take steps. The order is to look into the matter and it was not FIR. What we did was much more, yet uncharitable remarks are made against SIT.