By IANS
New Delhi : Four days before Gujarat’s second and final phase of polling, Chief Minister Narendra Modi was slapped by the Supreme Court Wednesday with a contempt notice for allegedly justifying the police killing of a Muslim man.
A bench of Justices Tarun Chatterjee and Dalveer Bhandari, however, exempted him form personally appearing before it.
It issued the notice after five hours of arguments by counsels for various parties, including former additional solicitor general (ASG) and Modi’s lawyer Mukul Rohtagi, ASG Gopal Subramanian who is assisting the court as amicus curiae, as well as lawyers for the petitioners – Dushyant Dave for victim Sohrabuddin Sheikh’s brother Rubabuddin and Prashant Bhushan for Javed Akhtar, Bollywood lyricist and social activist.
The pleas for launching contempt proceedings against Modi and a probe into his role in the killing were filed after he allegedly justified Sohrabuddin’s death in a staged police shootout in Ahmedabad in November 2005.
Addressing an election rally at Mangrol in south Gujarat on Dec 4, he said Sohrabuddin had hoarded weapons and was planning terror attacks in Gujarat. He asked the crowd what should be done to an “anti-national and terrorist” like him and his supporters shouted back: “kill him”.
Modi then said: “Should my police go to seek (Congress chief) Sonia Gandhi’s permission for that?”
The remarks created a controversy as the killing is under probe following the Supreme Court’s directive. The Gujarat government has, in fact, told the apex court in an affidavit that its anti-terror squad personnel had erred in killing Sohrabuddin and has arrested three senior police officials.
During the arguments, Rohtagi told the court that Sohrabuddin had been convicted under the now defunct Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act and his appeal against conviction was still pending before the apex court.
The bench, however, issued the notice discarding Rohtagi’s argument to adjourn the matter till the assembly election process in the state was completed.
While the first phase of polling in Gujarat took place Tuesday, the remaining areas will vote Sunday, with the vote count Dec 23.
Arguing that Modi made the remarks only in response to Gandhi’s speech a day before allegedly dubbing him as among “merchants of death”, Rohtagi said: “If the notice is issued, one side will take advantage and if the petition is dismissed, the other side would exploit it.
“In both cases, the court runs the risk of unwittingly getting drawn into the vortex of politics,” he told the bench, which at one point appeared set to adjourn the matter till January.
Rohtagi argued that the Election Commission was already seized of the matter involving the controversial speeches by the two leaders and any decision by the court would also influence the poll panel.
“If Modi is found guilty of contempt, he would be convicted. This court is much higher and powerful than any chief minister. But I am afraid of rival parties misusing the court’s decision either way,” said Rohtagi.
He also argued that Modi’s speech prima facie showed no contempt of the court.
The bench, however, issued the notice after Rubabuddin’s counsel pointed out that it was not an election petition, seeking disqualification of a candidate for violation of electoral laws.
“It is a petition for launching contempt of court proceedings and the matter at this juncture was purely between the court and the petitioner, who has to satisfy the court that the judicial process has been interfered with,” said Dushyant Dave, contending that Modi’s counsel did not even have a right to be heard at this juncture.
Opposing Rohtagi’s request to adjourn the matter till the state elections were over, he said, “The Gujarat government has taken this court along a garden path. Every time the court has taken up the matter related to Sohrabuddin’s extra-judicial killing, the Gujarat government has only sought adjournment on count or another.”
“This court is powerful enough to foil the efforts by politicians to politicise its decisions,” he said.