SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2004 Supreme(SC) 1727

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
ARIJIT PASAYAT, H.K. SEMA, JJ.
Zahira Habibullah Sheikh and another - Appellants
Versus
State of Gujarat and others - Respondents
CRL.M.P. Nos. 6658-6661/2004 In Criminal Appeal Nos. 446-449/2004.
Decided on : 01-11-2004

Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellants :Ms. Aparna Bhat, Mr. P. Ramesh Kumar, Ms. Anuradha Singh, Advocates.
For the Respondents:Ms. Hemantika Wahi, Mrs. Manitga Varma, Mrs. Archana P. Khopde, Dr. Kailash Chand, Mr. Nikhil Goel, Mr. Mukesh K. Giri, Mr. Sanjay Jain, Advocates.

Headnote:

Constitution of India, 1950, Articles 32, 21, 19 and 129 - Post-Godhra communal riots in Gujarat in 2002 - It was revealed that Ms Zahira Habibullah Sheikh had submitted an affidavit to the Vadodara Collector through her lawyer that the statements she gave earlier in the Fast Track Court were true statements- The necessary corollary was that what had been stated by her in her affidavits, which form part of the record of Supreme Court, were not correct and were false affidavits- Notice issued to Ms. Zahira Habibullah Sheikh to respond to the statements and to explain as to why they did not amount to contempt- Notice also swere parties in the appeals- To be listed accordingly. [Paras 2 to 4]

ORDER :

1. Statements (English translations) recorded in connection with Crime No.II/41/03 under the Detection of Crime Branch Police Station have been filed.

2. Learned counsel for the State of Maharashtra states that copy of the statement of Zahira Habibullah Sheikh, as recorded by the Maharashtra police has been supplied to the Gujarat police. It is for the officials of the said State to take such action as is warranted in law.

3. Reply of the accused persons who have been arrested, in the contempt proceedings has been filed. This matter shall be subsequently examined.

4. It is brought to our notice that Mr. P.R. Vakil, who was appointed as the Special Prosecutor, has died in the meantime and presently Mrs. Manjula Rao is appearing as the Special Prosecutor for the prosecution. It is submitted that she may need assistance of other lawyer(s) for better functioning. It is open to Mrs. Manjula Rao to bring to the notice of the State of Gujarat as to the lawyer(s) whose assistance she needs. This shall be done after ascertaining views of the victims as was directed earlier. Thereafter, the State of Gujarat shall issue necessary notification appointing such lawyer(s) to assist Ms. Rao in the trial currently being held in the State of Maharashtra.

5. Call the matters after four weeks.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top