When history records the criminal jurisprudence of this decade, the top honours would certainly be reserved for the Ishrat Jahan case.
The case stands out for many reasons. The manner in which the CBI is hounding a very senior counter-terrorism expert is a unique first. One does hope that this is the first and last time that an investigation takes such an obnoxious turn.
During the last two decades, the higher judiciary has also started “monitoring” important criminal cases. While this practice started with the Jain Hawala case, it has now taken another turn with the courts appointing Special Investigation Teams to carry out investigations and prosecutions. The ostensible reason for this is the likelihood of bias among investigating officers.
The practice has served the criminal justice system well in many instances. The Supreme Court, in the many cases relating to the Gujarat 2002 riots, appointed a very distinguished IPS officer, RK Raghavan, as the chairman of the SIT. Retiring as the CBI Director, Raghavan had served both the Intelligence Bureau and his cadre State Tamil Nadu with great distinction.
Is Congress playing dirty communal politics on Ishrat Jahan encounter death?
Such Special Investigation Teams can be successful and can gain confidence only when officers of high integrity are appointed to them. This cardinal principle seems to have been given a go-by when Satish Verma was appointed as one of the Investigation Officers in the Ishrat Jahan case. Verma is alleged to have ordered such fake encounters when he was the SP in Porbandar. Ironically, it is the same Gujarat High Court that has ordered a detailed inquiry and investigation into those alleged fake encounters that Verma is charged with organising.
In 1996, one Samji Ladha, claiming to be an office-bearer of Action Committee for Prevention of Police Atrocities, filed a petition in the Gujarat High Court asking the Court to order an inquiry by a high ranking judicial officer into the alleged fake encounter killings of Jasu Gagan Shial, Aher Ranmal Ram and Aher Naran Jesthi Bandiya, all of which took place in 1996. The Collector did order a magisterial inquiry by a Sub-Divisional Magistrate, who found that there was no truth in the allegations and that there was no misuse of force by the police. Aher Naran Jesthi Bnadhiya was in fact in police custody when he, requesting for permission to use the facilities, absconded from custody and then was found hanging on a tree. The Magistrate found nothing amiss in this!
Centre misusing IB in encounter case for political gains
The two-judge bench of the Gujarat High Court of then Chief Justice K Sridharan and Justice Anil Dave did not buy the police and State argument. The order states “From the materials now placed before us the version of the police regarding death of Jasu Gagan Shial does not appear to be correct. In such a situation his death may be an offence punishable under the Indian Penal Code. Likewise the circumstances which led to the death of other two individuals mentioned hereinbefore also may amount to offences punishable under the Indian Penal Code.”
The Judges however declined the prayer for either a judicial inquiry or a CBI inquiry. Directions were issued to the Special IGP CID to investigate the crimes and if warranted, bring the accused to trial. After this order of March 9, 1998, there has been no progress in the investigations in the past 15 years, this despite the Division Bench’s order to the police to complete the investigation the case within six months!
On July 27, 2012, now almost a year ago, Justice Anant Dave of the Gujarat High Court has once again directed the State’s Additional DGP Crime to investigate the same case and submit his report within three months.
While the process of investigations into these alleged encounter deaths will follow a judicial process, it is imperative that one of main officers involved, Satish Verma, is removed from the Ishrat Jahan SIT. It clearly does not make sense for the CBI to have an officer accused of the same kind of heinous crimes they are investigating to be a part of another similar investigation.
