It would be fair to say that, right from the start, the legal system has struggled to come to terms with what happened in 2002, Gujarat, and at no point has it followed the ordinary course laid down by the law.


From reinvestigations by court-appointed special investigation teams, to special fast-track courts, to transfers outside the state; all of these were exceptional interventions, and were conducted under the gaze of the Supreme Court.


For many, it was seen as a testament to the commitment of the judiciary to ensure that justice is not only done but must also be seen to be done, even if, at times, by ignoring regular criminal procedure. As a sitting justice of the Supreme Court recently observed in a public lecture, the law and justice are not the same thing.


We are currently witnessing the aftermath of the most recent turn in this history of procedural exceptions to the law in respect of the Gujarat riots, where in a 24 June 2022 order dismissing petitions [Zakia Ahsan Jafri v. State of Gujarat & Anr.] for proceeding in complaints filed by one of the victims to pursue what has been dubbed as the “larger conspiracy”, the Supreme Court went ahead to make specific and pointed remarks about the roles played by certain individuals, seen by the Court as having preyed on the victims’ emotions to keep the “pot boiling”.


The Court stated in its order that these persons “need to be in the dock and proceeded with in accordance with law”. The very next day, a willing police agency obliged and registered a case against, among others, Teesta Setalvad, a former journalist turned activist, and R B Sreekumar, a former director general of police in Gujarat, with the first information report (FIR) carrying extracts of the Supreme Court’s order.


This is not a piece about whether the Supreme Court could or should have done things differently. That ship has sailed.

Read more - https://article-14.com/post/the-twisted-course-of-justice-that-landed-an-activist-former-police-officer-in-jail--62f30fe817943