[<<The lawyer of Sohrabuddin Shaikh’s brother Rubabuddin on Wednesday
pointed to the “integral role” of Dinesh M N, the Superintendent of Police
in Udaipur during the alleged fake encounter, and told the court that while
the officer got discharged from the CBI court in the case, his juniors who
were allegedly part of his team were not given a discharge. The court was
hearing three applications filed by Rubabuddin challenging the discharge of
former deputy inspector-general of Gujarat D G Vanzara, Rajasthan IPS
officer Dinesh M N and Gujarat IPS officer Rajkumar Pandiyan, along with
two applications filed by the CBI challenging the discharge of Rajasthan
Police constable Dalpat Singh Rathod and Gujarat police officer N K Amin.>>]

http://indianexpress.com/article/india/sohrabuddin-case-discharged-officer-played-same-role-as-juniors-on-trial-says-rubabuddins-lawyer5064382/

Sohrabuddin case: Discharged officer played same role as juniors on trial,
says Rubabuddin’s lawyer
Lawyer says then Udaipur SP had no intention of arresting Sohrabuddin

Written by Ruhi Bhasin |

Mumbai | Updated: February 15, 2018 5:59 am

 Sohrabuddin case Sohrabuddin Shaikh and his wife. (File Photo)

The lawyer of Sohrabuddin Shaikh’s brother Rubabuddin on Wednesday pointed
to the “integral role” of Dinesh M N, the Superintendent of Police in
Udaipur during the alleged fake encounter, and told the court that while
the officer got discharged from the CBI court in the case, his juniors who
were allegedly part of his team were not given a discharge. The court was
hearing three applications filed by Rubabuddin challenging the discharge of
former deputy inspector-general of Gujarat D G Vanzara, Rajasthan IPS
officer Dinesh M N and Gujarat IPS officer Rajkumar Pandiyan, along with
two applications filed by the CBI challenging the discharge of Rajasthan
Police constable Dalpat Singh Rathod and Gujarat police officer N K Amin.

Read | Failure of justice system in Sohrabuddin case, Bombay HC should
relook: Ex-judge Abhay M Thipsay

Rubabuddin’s lawyer Gautam Tiwari of Probus Legal continued his arguments
over the discharge of Dinesh. One of the reasons for the CBI court
discharging him on August 1, 2017, was that the agency had failed to get
sanction or special permission to prosecute him.

Dinesh’s involvement is suspected in the alleged fake encounters of both
Sohrabuddin and his associate Tulsiram Prajapati. He allegedly travelled on
November 24, 2005, from Udaipur to Ahmedabad for the alleged encounter of
Sohrabuddin on November 26. He was allegedly accompanied by three junior
officers of Rajasthan police, including Rehman Abdul Khan.

“The discharge application of Khan was rejected by the CBI court, which
granted discharge to Dinesh M N. Khan was the one to file an FIR soon after
the incident (Sohrabuddin’s alleged encounter) and the one to inform his
colleagues in Rajasthan where to arrest Prajapati from…. The roles of Khan
and Dinesh are identical,” Tiwari said. Justice Revati Mohite-Dere, who is
hearing the revision application, asked if Khan’s application was rejected
before or after Dinesh was discharged. “Khan’s application was rejected on
July 25, 2017, while Dinesh was discharged on August 1 the same year,”
Tiwari said.

Interview | There are many unnatural things that I saw when I started
looking at the orders

Tiwari informed the court that the police were after Sohrabuddin and
Prajapati in connection with the Hamid Lala murder case in Udaipur on
December 31, 2004. Pointing to the statement of the investigating officer
(IO) in the case, Tiwari said it clearly showed that the team that went
from Rajasthan to Gujarat had no intention of arresting Sohrabuddin. “The
IO in the Hamid Lala case clearly said he was not informed or taken to
arrest Shaikh who was a suspect in Lala’s killing. If they had any
intention of arresting him (Shaikh), they would have at least taken the
case record in the event they needed to seek his transit remand from
Gujarat to Rajasthan,” Tiwari pointed out.

Also Read | No witness has spoken about threat, sought protection, CBI
tells Bombay HC

Relying on the statements of Dinesh’s seniors, Tiwari said Dinesh did not
follow the official procedure to seek permission to travel to Gujarat with
the intention of arresting Sohrabuddin. His superior was informed just
before his departure that he would be leaving for Gujarat and then only an
“oral permission” was sought from him, said Tiwari.

Read | Witnesses are turning hostile, what protection, Bombay HC asks CBI

The statement of the officer who kept Dinesh’s records was further referred
to in an attempt to show that Dinesh was present at the encounter of
Sohrabuddin. “The record of the record keeper confirms that encounter took
place with Dinesh present at the incident,” said Tiwari. In the case of
Prajapati’s alleged encounter, the statement of a police officer in
Rajasthan was relied upon to show that while Prajapati was arrested on
November 26, 2005, after Sohrabuddin’s encounter, the officials were given
instructions not to show his arrest till two to three days later, besides
being told that Prajapati would be examined by Dinesh only. His arrest was
eventually shown on November 29, 2005.

READ | Here is list of 15 discharged so far

Meanwhile, statements of inmates of Udaipur Jail was relied upon to show
how Prajapati’s nephew and friend were implicated in a false case after
they went to meet him in jail. Prajapati had written to the National Human
Rights Commission, raising concerns over a threat to his life from the
Gujarat and Rajasthan police. “It is an institutional failure that his life
could not be safeguarded. The complaint made to the NHRC was forwarded to
Dinesh to investigate,” said Tiwari. He also said that while Prajapati was
given heavy police protection in earlier instances when he travelled to
Ahmedabad, on the day of the alleged encounter, he had only four police
escorts to take him from Udaipur to Ahmedabad in connection with a criminal
case on December 26, 2006.

Sohrabuddin, an alleged gangster who, the Gujarat police claimed had “links
with the terror outfit Lashkar-e-Taiba” and his wife Kausarbi were
allegedly abducted by Gujarat ATS from Hyderabad on their way to Sangli in
Maharashtra and killed in an alleged fake encounter near Gandhinagar in
November 2005. Prajapati was allegedly killed by police officers at Chapri
village in the Banaskantha district of Gujarat in December 2006.
-- 
Peace Is Doable

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Green Youth Movement" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to greenyouth+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to greenyouth@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to