Sohrabuddin case: SC rejects plea against clean chit to Shah

In a major relief for Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) chief Amit Shah, the Supreme Court on Monday rejected the petition against his discharge in the Sohrabuddin fake encounter case.

Mander had sought the quashing of a Mumbai Sessions Court order from December 30, 2014, which exonerated Shah saying he was investigated in the case for “political reasons”. Sohrabuddin Sheikh along with his wife, Kauser Bi were killed while travelling from Hyderabad to Sangli (Maharashtra). His aide Tulsiram Prajapati was murdered on December 28, 2006. A preliminary inquiry indicated that the encounters were “fake” and carried out by the police at the behest of the then Gujarat Home Minister Amit Shah.

Senior advocate Kapil Sibbal, appearing for the petitioner, tried to justify Harsh Mander’s locus standi by citing corruption cases but the bench rejected his contention, saying “there can not be a comparison”.

Requesting the top court to allow him to challenge Shah’s exoneration before the Bombay High Court, Sibal contended that it was “unfair” of the CBI not to file an appeal after the trial court discharged him.

The court shot back, noting it “does not consider anyone above the law”.

A bench of Justices S.A. Bobde and Ashok Bhushan dismissed the SLP observing that being a third party, the petitioner has no locus standi to file the appeal when Sohrabuddin’s brother Rubabuddin, the interested person, had chosen to withdraw the appeal in the Bombay HC against the discharge.

The Supreme Court bench asked his lawyer, Sibal, to first explain Mander’s locus standi.

He said, “CBI has filed a charge sheet and had made Shah accused number 16”. Let the High Court hear me and then it can dismiss my petition on merits.

He said, “This court has already held that if one is not connected with the case, he can not interfere with anyone’s trial”.

He also said this court has held that a third party can not be allowed to interfere in the trial unless it is an aggrieved party. Mandar had then moved the High Court against the discharge of Shah, but his plea had been rejected. “Tomorrow, if a film star’s acquittal is not challenged by the State, somebody will come and say I am filing this appeal – it is a very risky proposition”, he argued.

Senior advocate Harish Salve, appearing for Shah, cited various judgments of the apex court and questioned the locus of Mander in the case by saying that the court has already held that if someone is not connected to the case, he can not interfere with anyone’s trial unless the third party involved is an aggrieved party.