Furthermore, Jamuar also said that SIT was never asked to probe into the conspiracy angle of the post-Godhra riots by the Supreme Court, which constituted the probe agency and it would have been unconstitutional had it done so.
“The SIT was mandated to investigate nine cases, including the Godhra train burning incident. In six cases, investigation has been completed and judgements have been delivered. The appeals of convicts and some of the acquitted in some cases are pending before the Gujarat High Court,” he had said.
However, Jafri's lawyers had argued that SIT, throughout its investigation, totally ignored the evidence and material and even alleged that the Supreme Court appointed probe agency was shielding the main culprits behind the 2002 riots, in which close to 1,000 people were killed.
“The SIT, instead of functioning like an independent investigating agency, has been doing the job of shielding the powerful accused,” advocate Mihir Desai had said, during his submissions on behalf of Jafri.
They also alleged that the SIT had been ‘misleading' the court and ‘deliberately distorting' higher court's orders.
Zakia's lawyers also maintained that there was enough evidence to prosecute Modi for alleged role in the post-Godhra riots.
