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

Rohatgi:It was directed that this report which is a compendium of reports of Malhotra and Shukla be filed in the Gulberg matter. In law when chargesheet have been filed in court, when court is in seizure of the matter, this complaint is in the nature of further material.

Rohatgi: One Himangshu Shukla conducted enquiry and gave report. Total of these report in term of witnesses is 275 is not an independent case, it is qua Gulberg because the gentleman was killed in Gulberg, she lived in Gulberg, she has some knowledge about Gulberg.

Rohatgi: Then the SC lifted the stay. Mr. Malhotra said that from the complaint no offence were not borne out. He said some further investigation be done. He had recommended in reference to 3 ppl including Zadafia.

Rohatgi: Allegation were flying thick and fast against the state police etc. that is why the SC appointed the SIT. We did our job- somebody might agree, somebody might not agree. One member of SIT, Malhotra, retired DIG from CBI virtually became an IO.

Rohatgi: Complaint was not an FIR, no court said that. SC said examine, it is in the nature of preliminary enquiry because it was prior FIR.

Rohatgi: When the courts had taken cognisance. Matters were ripe for trial, this case came to the SC. 24.04.2009 order - in the petition against the Guj HC order, since SIT was already in place, the SC told SIT to take her case and examine.

Rohatgi: My friend yesterday talked about, Major Gen posted in Gujarat wrote that army was not given support. They were called on the same. So, Zameeruddin Shah’s statement is irrelevant. If he had to say something who stopped him to come before the SIT.

Rohatgi: We were appointed to examine the complaint, because 9 cases were already charge sheeted by the state police, with several supplementary chargesheet. When SIT took over they added several chargesheet and several accused.

Rohatgi: In fact some said that it was a part of the script. SIT found no substance in that to lodge a FIR or chargesheet. SIT gave the sting material to the court in three different courts out of those 9. One particular court had also rejected the material of the sting.

Rohatgi: Then the Tehelka tapes surfaced. One and half years after the complaint. There is no dispute on the genuineness of the tape. But the SIT found that the contents of the tape in as much as sting operation etc. the statements made before Khetan inspired no confidence.

Rohatgi: Had she gone to court in 2007-08 she could have improved her complaint. But she comes to SIT. SC appointed SIT on NHRC petition. They were charged will the investigation of all the 9 cases, even when the trials were stayed.