Gujarat High Court yesterday reserved judgment on whether Chief Minister Narendra Modi and others should be summoned by the Nanavati-Mehta enquiry commission, which is inquiring into the 2002 riots cases
Gujarat High Court yesterday reserved judgment on whether Chief Minister Narendra Modi and others should be summoned by the Nanavati-Mehta enquiry commission, which is inquiring into the 2002 riots cases. First bench of the court comprising Chief Justice SJ Mukhopadhaya and Justice Akil Kureshi reserved the judgment after hearing Advocate General Kamal Trivedi and counsel for the petitioner, Mukul Sinha.
During the arguments yesterday, Trivedi opposed the plea stating that the petitioners had no right to ask the commission to summon someone and seek their cross examination under Commission of Enquiries Act. Sinha, on the other hand, submitted that the government had made a reference to the commission under the Act to examine the code and conduct of people who may be involved in the case.
He stated that when the government had already made a reference, it couldn't turn around and deny the probe. The court had earlier raised a query of its jurisdiction to entertain the plea. The court had asked both the parties whether it can direct a commission of inquiry while exercising the power under Article 226 of the Constitution.
Addressing this issue, Sinha had submitted: "The commission of inquiry is a statutory body and is duty bound to inquire upon the reference made to it in accordance with law. He stated that when a grievance is raised, then a court of law can decide and direct the commission in an appropriate manner.
The bench had questioned as to whether the witnesses before the commission had right to cross-examine, and if so then under which provisions of law. The judges had sought to know whether the witness, if so permitted, would thenhave the right to cross-examine the person under section 8B of the Act.
Sinha told the court that questioning of Chief Minister Narendra Modi, other ministers and police personnel, was essential by the commission as failing to do so would amount to taking away the whole merit of constituting the commission for the purpose of making a public inquiry regarding the 2002 Godhra carnage incident and subsequent communal riots.
ADVERTISEMENT