Offstumped – Commentary on India


Politics, Policy and all things Digital about India


When it comes to anything legal about Narendra Modi, Delhi’s Legal system it would seem leaks like a sieve. So we have a choice of leaks on the Amicus Curiae report across media outlets from The Hindu to the Times of India. The difference in emphasis between The Hindu and The TOI was stark though. While The Hindu tried to overplay a recommendation on a possible chargesheet against Narendra Modi, the TOI tempered its leak with a focus on a recommendation to press charges against specific Gujarat Police Officers.

The pre-emptive leak of the Amicus Curiae report is yet another instance of an oft repeated pattern followed by the anti-Narendra-Modi NGO activists. The leaks are meant to prejudice an already polarized public opinion irrespective of legal merit or Judicial consequence. It is significant that atleast the Times of India made it a point in its leak to rightly highlight the following

#1 the Amicus Curiae report here is not an independent investigation

#2 the Amicus Curiae has uncovered no new facts

#3 the Amicus Curiae has merely expressed an opinion that dissents with the professional opinion of a Supreme Court Appointed Investigation Team

To begin with the Supreme Court has gravely erred by injecting an element of doubt into the professional opinion of a professional investigation/prosecution team by calling for an Amicus Curiae review in the first place. This sets a dangerous precedent where every investigation will second guessed and every instance of prosecutorial discretion will be questioned on its legitimacy and credibility.

The Amicus Curiae opinion expressed in this report is nothing more than a dissenting opinion that is about as weighty as the millions of letters to the editor, tweets and blogs that routinely express opinions of dissent. It cannot and should not be the basis for reversing the professional decisions of the SIT in the absence of substantiative new facts or evidence.

One sincerely hopes the SIT uses its judgement and discretion in putting the Amicus Curiae opinion in perspective leaving no room for  2002 riot victims to entertain any further lingering doubts on whether justice has been done to them. One also sincerely hopes the Magisterial Court empowered to take notice of this report, deals with it in a manner it deserves.

About these ads

Filed under: Narendra Modi, UPA-II Critical Appraisal

5 Responses

  1. seadog4227 says:

    You are the only one to comment on this point. Both the “newspapers” are past experts at deliberate leaks, especially when it is in direct opposition to mainstream Hindu opinions or concerns. The Slimes, in particular, has it coming for a long time.

  2. karthik iyer says:

    a very interesting situatn..if media leaks(toi/hindu) to b believed,on one hand SIT has concluded dat bhatt is a liar based on thourogh invstgtn, on d other hand, amicus based on same evidences (examined by SIT) “cant form a conclusion” on bhatt reliability…nw filing a chargesheet means prosecutn “claim” 2 hav solid evidnce whch can pass d test of legal scrutiny.nw if in dis case, SIT decides 2 chargesheet modi, only evidnce “it wil hav at dat time’ will b testimony of bhatt, which SIT itslf had concluded unreliable aftr professional invstgtn n legal opinion(SIT has ben provided privelge 2 take legal opinion by SC recommended lawyer like menon).also,2b rembrd, out of 2 ppl cited by bhatt in his support, one(pant) has alrdy rebutted his claims n filed a case agnst him..since, raju has nt collectd any evidenc based on whch SIT can think of disregarding its own report, it will b vry hard for SIT to frame a chargesheet w/o havng any sort of evidenc 2 back dose charges

  3. Jitendra Desai says:

    Anti Modi industry now is worried that he may actually be nominated as PM candidate by entire NDA immediately after 2012 state assembly elections.These are their attempts to prevent THAT.Modi in Delhi will put large number of Left liberals out of jobs for a very long time.If he is installed as PM in 2014, he will ensure victories for NDA in 2019 and beyond.

  4. karthik iyer says:

    also hav some doubts over veracity of the hindu report dat amicus hav recommended prosecution for the reason dat one side the hindu report says amicus has nt takn a final view as to whthr bhatt version is correct or nt(n furthr cross examintn ned 2 happn 2 establsh truth)n on d othr side it says amicus recommend prosecutn basd on bhatt version..its any one guess dat hw amicus wud recommnd a chargesheet whn he himslf says relaibilty of bhatt is yet to b established(situtn wud hav ben diffrnt if he had concluded bhatt version is correct).its also posb dat amicus might hav recommended cross examintn of bhatt(nt sure how) n wud hav concluded “if” bhatt testitmony is establshd as truth den chargesheet 2b filed undr various sectns..rembr erlir tOI reprtd amicus has only chrgd modi for speeches nw tody thy hav cme out wid diffrnt version thgh it still quite diffrnt 4m the hindu report..

  5. [...] on 23rd october 2011, this blogger wrote: When it comes to anything legal about Narendra Modi, Delhi’s Legal system it would seem leaks [...]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Live Tweets

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 23,809 other followers

Offstumped Archives


Opinions expressed on this site using the alias Offstumped are the blogger's personal opinions and do not in any way reflect the views of the blogger's Employers.
%d bloggers like this: