SC hints at Advani trial
Continued from Page 1 questioned the dropping of the conspiracy charge against Mr Advani and others. He argued that the 21 accused including Dr Joshi, Vinay Katiyar, Ashok Singhal and Giriraj Kishore, were the persons who participated in the demolition of the Babri Masjid in December 1992. But the trial court discharged them from the charge of conspiracy and this order was affirmed by the Allahabad high court on technical grounds. Contending that the order to drop conspiracy charges was bad in law, he sought a direction to quash the high court order.
The bench of Justice P.C. Ghose and R.F. Nariman made it clear to the counsel that since 25 years had already passed, in the interest of justice to all, the matter should be heard in one court, preferably in Lucknow by including conspiracy charge against all the 21 accused and kar sevaks. Other leaders included are Uma Bharti, Dr Joshi, Vinay Katiyar, Sadhvi Ritambara, Giriraj Kishore and Vishnu Hari Dalmia.
When senior advocate K.K. Venugopal, appearing for Mr Advani and Mr Joshi, objected to this, the Bench said, “We will use our extraordinary powers under Article 142 of the Constitution to transfer the Babri Masjid demolition related trial in Rae Bareilly to a Lucknow court, where the CBI filed a composite chargesheet by including conspiracy and other serious criminal charges against lakhs of unknown kar sevaks for the demolition of the Babri Masjid.”
Justice Ghose told the counsel, “A person should not suffer litigation for 25 years. In your own interest, the trial must come to an end and it is for your betterment. Why should it be kept pending for 25 years.”
Referring to argument that transfer of the pending case from Rae Barelly to Lucknow court would violate fundamentals right under Article 21 (fair trial), Justice Nariman said “transfer from one court to another court is a complete procedural issue, we are not violating any of your rights. We have power to transfer from one court to another as it is a technical ground on which it was not done. Justice Ghose described the delay as an “evasion of justice” and said, “We will direct the trial to be completed in two years. There will be day-today hearing.”
On the delay Justice Nariman said, “How many of the accused are dead and some will die now.” As far as the Rae Bareilly case is concerned, the court has examined 57 witnesses and have to examine another 105. In Lucknow, in the case against kar sevaks, 195 witnesses had been examined and 800 witnesses are yet to be examined.
Mr Venugopal pointed out that the Allahabad high court had set aside the transfer of the Rae Bareilly case to Lucknow in February 2001. The SC had accepted the UP government’s decision to continue the trial separately in Rae Bareilly. A transfer of the Rae Bareilly trial to Lucknow would negate all the past orders.
ASG Kaul argued that the high court order of 2001 had said that a prima facie case of conspiracy has been made out against the leaders and it still stood against them. When the Bench wanted to know the practical problems in having a joint trial in Lucknow, Mr Kaul said witnesses would have to be recalled and the trial may have to start “de novo (afresh)”. Kapil Sibal, appearing for one of the intervenors, however, said that the trial need not start afresh.