‘If Dawood Ibrahim can be booked in blast case, why not Narendra Modi?’
Ahmedabad: Gulbarg society victim Zakia Jafri’s lawyer continued to slam the Supreme Court-appointed Special Investigation Team (SIT) for ignoring the clinching evidence against chief minister Narendra Modi for his alleged role in orchestrating the 2002 riots.
Coming down heavily on the SIT, Jafri’s lawyer Mihir Desai on Tuesday pointedly asked that if Dawood Ibrahim and Tiger Memon could be named accused in the 1993 Mumbai serial blasts case without them being present in the country, why can SIT not arraign Modi and others as accused of being involved in the riots? The lawyer tried to convey the message to the court that the SIT was only involved in naming accused only those persons present on the spot and committed the crime and not those who aided and abetted the communal riots.
“Our case is not only limited to those found from the place of offence and who executed the offence. But our case is also against those who provoke, abet, aid and planned. The SIT is suffering from a delusion that those who were not present were not the culprits,” said Desai.
The counsel also alleged that the SIT had changed its view about the infamous speech of Modi at Becharaji in Mehsana district in 2002. First, they found it communal, but later changed its stand. It also did not entertain evidence sent by retired state director-general of police RB Sreekumar exposing laxity on part of the state government to curtail the riots.
Coming down heavily on the SIT, Jafri\'s lawyer Mihir Desai on Tuesday pointedly asked this question.