Sohrabuddin case: Lawyers’ union moves HC against CBI

PIL filed for seeking a direction to CBI to challenge acquittal of all accused

The stand of the Central Bureau of Investigations (CBI) in which it has decided not to challenge the discharge of any accused including Amit Shah and the top Gujarat policemen, accused in the Sohrabuddin Shaikh case seems to have not gone down well with a citybased advocates’ association.

The association has filed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking a direction to the CBI to challenge the discharge of all the accused.

The alleged fake encounter case of Sohrabuddin Shaikh has been in the spotlight since last few months owing to the startling developments in the case, especially, after the interview of the family members of special Judge BH Loya, who raised doubts over his death in ‘mysterious’ circumstances.

The PIL has been filed by the Bombay Lawyers’ Association through their advocate Ahmed Abdi. The PIL seeks a direction to the CBI to file a revision application and challenge the orders of the special court, which has discharged several accused in the case.

Confirming the news, Abdi said, “We have filed this PIL with the HC registry and would be mentioning it before a division bench of Justice Satyaranjan Dharmadhikari and Justice Bharati Dangre on January 22.” The petition states, “The CBI is the premier investigating the agency. It has the public duty to observe the rule of law in its action but the agency has miserably failed to do so.”

The petition also cited the act of the CBI wherein it has challenged the discharge of two Rajasthan Police sub-inspectors – Himanshu Singh and Shyam Singh Charan. And also, the discharge of senior Gujarat police officer NK Amin has been challenged by the central agency, the petition cites. The petition reads, “We have learnt through various sources that the central agency has challenged the discharge of three accused before the High Court. This act of the CBI in challenging the discharge of few accused persons on a selective basis is arbitrary and unreasonable, rather mala fide.”

The petition also cites the orders of the Supreme Court to the Administrative Committee of the Bombay High Court, asking it to assign the matter to a single judicial officer. The petition highlights the part of the order which specifically stated that the matter must be heard by a single judge from the beginning till the end.