Guj HC questions extension to Nanavati Commission, Favours to Sons
/ 0
- Current News
- Friday, 04 May 2012 12:17
- Published on Friday, 04 May 2012 18:18
- Hits: 591
Gujarat Global News Network, Ahmedabad
A PIL filed in the Gujarat High Courts seems to have stirred up a hornets’ nest. The PIL has accused the state government of favouring the chairman of the riots inquiry commission – retired justice GT Nanavati – by appointing his sons as prosecutors.
Calling these “embarrassing facts”, the HC has sought the details of employment of additional public prosecutors and assistant government pleaders and the remuneration paid to them. However, the judges were of the view that the petitioner’s prayer in this regard cannot be entertained unless they (Nanavati’s sons) are made party to the litigation.
The bench asked advocate-general Kamal Trivedi whether he was aware of the appointment of Maulik and Dhaval. Trivedi denied any knowledge on this issue. Later, government pleader Prakash Jani told the court that the appointments were finalized only after the HC’s nod.
The bench was eager to know about the status of findings of the inquiry commission, particularly when in many cases there are judgments pronounced. “When there are judicial pronouncements after conducting of trial in riots cases, how a commission can give its conclusion,” the bench enquired.
Trivedi and Jani tried to explain to the court that the commission functions with different terms of reference and one of them, as expanded in 2004, was to probe individual role in controlling riots. To this, the acting chief justice immediately said: “If there is any negligence on part of authority (in controlling riots), it’s an offence.”
The bench has now sought details about the terms of reference of the Nanavati probe commission. The bench was also keen to know why the probe panel was granted nine-month extension, when the commission itself conveyed to the court that it would come up with final report by March 31, as the term of the commission was then extended for three months only.
The state government tried to defend the extension citing the reason that the probe panel wanted to go through the SIT’s probe report.
For news in Hindi see our Hindi daily Chaupal Chronicle
