Judiciary that fell prey to fake encounter
As expected, all 22 accused in Sohrabuddin murder case have been acquitted for lack of evidence. In some way, it looks like the culprits themselves argued their own cases and declared themselves innocent. How can we even dream of the culprits being punished when the courts, CBI, and other investigation agencies are under the claws of mighty and powerful who are siding with the accused? Amit Shah’s name was in the forefront when it came to Sohrabuddin's murder case. If fake encounter is proved, it will mean along with the officers who executed the plan, even the leaders who ordered the killing will face jail time. One of the main accused in this case had said before the media that if these charges are proved, many others would face prison along with him.
This was an indirect threat he had issued to the leaders in Delhi. Now even the small foot soldiers in this case have been issued a clean chit. This directly means those sitting in Delhi have heaved a sigh of relief. The main investigating officer in this case had long ago revealed to the media that justice may not be done in this case for many reasons. Not only this, the government itself tried to silence the investigation officer because he knew the details of Sohrabuddin encounter and the people who masterminded it.
About 13 years ago, owing to relentless crusade by a Gujarati police officer Vasant Lalji Bhai Solanki, the killings of Sohrabuddin, his wife Kausar Bi and their assistant Tulsiram Prajapati's deaths came to light.After a long inquiry, Solanki submitted a report calling these deaths fake encounters and named every police officer who was behind these murders. Solanki had mentioned that Amit Shah was also part of these deaths and their planning, along with everyone else who had worked to end these lives. But this whole effort was reduced to dust after CBI took up this case. Ironically, government withdrew the security cover given to Solanki. He could not even visit the court. He told the media that “if a judge who was sitting on this case could die ever so suddenly, I am a retired police officer. People who are desperate to get a clean chit, can do anything for to clear up their own name.”
Solanki remembered that when Justice Brij Gopal Harikishan Loya died on December 1, 2014 in Nagpur, his security cover had been withdrawn just few days prior to that. Sohrabuddin encounter is significant for many reasons because he wasn't killed for the fact that he was a criminal. He was witness to a prominent Gujarati businessman's murder and that caused his death by murder that was plotted by the same forces. This news has been out in th media since long. Sohrabuddin knew details of the death of Gujarati BJP leader Harem Pandya's murder. He had shared with his accomplices that the death of Pandya was ordered from 'higher ups’ above.
Now why Pandya was killed is another aspect altogether. Pandya who had rebelled from the BJP had revealed the role of Gujarat government behind the muslim massacre. He had very significant information about this genocide. Reports of investigation say Pandya was murdered for the very reason. Everybody knows who was the CM and home minister around the time when these killings took place. If the culprits of Sohrabuddin murder are killed, even those who were involved in Pandya case would be brought to book as well. And the details of Gujarat genocide would be out on the open too. This would sound a death knell for Modi and Amit Shah. When things are this complicated, how can we expect Sohrabuddin encounter to be done justice to?
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Speaker rules out discussion on Guv''s conduct amid K''taka Assembly standoff
Bengaluru (PTI): In an effort to end the logjam over the Governor's address that has stalled proceedings for the past week, Karnataka Assembly Speaker U T Khader on Wednesday ruled that legislators should not discuss Thaawarchand Gehlot or his conduct in the house, saying such debates send the wrong message to the public.
The House has witnessed repeated disruptions and adjournments since the session began on January 22 over the issue of the governor's conduct.
During his address to the joint sitting of the Karnataka legislature on January 22, Gehlot read out only three sentences from the 122-paragraph speech prepared by the state government.
The speech included criticism of the Centre for replacing the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA) with the Viksit Bharat–Guarantee for Rozgar and Ajivika Mission (Gramin) (VB-G RAM G), portions of which the governor declined to read.
Concluding his address in about two minutes, the governor left the house, triggering a commotion as Congress legislators attempted to gherao him and raised slogans.
While the opposition BJP accused the ruling Congress and its ministers of "insulting" the governor and demanded action, the treasury benches countered by claiming the governor had "insulted the National Anthem by leaving before it was played."
The house again witnessed heated arguments on the issue earlier in the day, leading to adjournment.
During the interruption, Khader held a meeting with ministers and opposition members to resolve the impasse.
When proceedings resumed, the speaker delivered his ruling.
Referring to the events of January 22 and the subsequent debate, Khader said the conduct and discussions had conveyed the wrong message to the public.
"Our conduct as members of this House and the opinions expressed must be in good taste and in accordance with constitutional provisions. They must uphold the dignity of the House and its members. We must introspect in this direction," he said.
He stressed the need for caution to ensure that such incidents are not repeated in the future.
"Let us end this matter here, continue the discussion on the motion of thanks to the governor, and refrain from discussing the governor or his conduct in this house," the speaker said.
Leader of the Opposition R Ashoka said the house should express regret over what he termed an "insult" to the governor.
Responding, Chief Minister Siddaramaiah said the situation would not have arisen had the governor read out the entire address.
"Asking the house to express regret is not appropriate. Why did the governor leave even before the National Anthem was played," Siddaramaiah asked.
BJP MLA S Suresh Kumar reminded Siddaramaiah that as Leader of the Opposition in 2011, he had asked then Governor Hansraj Bhardwaj to curtail his address.
Bhardwaj had subsequently placed the address on the table of the house, requesting members to treat it as read.
Siddaramaiah said the situation in January 2011 was different from the present one.
The debate grew intense, leading to another adjournment of the house.
