A Sessions court in Ahmedabad on Thursday dismissed social activist Teesta Setalvad’s plea seeking discharge in a case related to alleged fabrication of evidence related to the 2002 Gujarat riots in which she and two former IPS officers are the key accused.
While rejecting the plea, Additional Sessions Judge A.R. Patel also asked the prosecution and defence to “open the case” (start trial proceedings) from July 24.
In its affidavit opposing her plea, the State government had stated that the accused cannot be discharged because she abused the trust of the victims of the riots by creating forged documents in their name and attempted to implicate innocent people using forged papers.
Ms. Setalvad along with former State Director-General of Police R. B. Sreekumar and former IPS officer Sanjiv Bhatt were arrested by the city Crime Branch in June 2022 on charges of forgery and fabricating false evidence with the intent to implicate the Gujarat government functionaries in case related to the 2002 riots.
On Wednesday, the Supreme Court granted her bail and set aside the Gujarat High Court order which had denied the regular bail to her.
Earlier, the Sessions court had also rejected plea of Mr. Sreekumar seeking discharge from the case.
The state government has cited the statements of Rais Khan Pathan, who once worked with Teesta’s NGO Citizens for Justice and Peace (CJP), who had told the police that all the affidavits of riots victims were prepared by Teesta while the victims were asked to sign on blank papers.
The State government affidavit also cited a statement of another person, Narendra Brahmbhattm, who had claimed that late Congress leader Ahmed Patel had paid ₹30 lakh to Ms. Setalvad.
The government also highlighted “contradictions” in the affidavits of riots victims prepared by her, and their own statements recorded before various courts. “There is sufficient evidence and reasons to file a chargesheet against the accused,” the affidavit said.
Rejecting the allegation that evidence was fabricated to frame innocent people, Ms. Setalvad’s lawyer had submitted that the affidavits, which are alleged to be false, had been signed by witnesses and submitted before various courts. These affidavits, therefore, can not be considered as “fabricated evidence”, the defence said. Even testimonies of witnesses were recorded by the courts based on the signed affidavits, it pointed out.
(With PTI inputs)
