New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Thursday reserved its order on the CBI’s petition seeking restoration of conspiracy charges against senior BJP leaders, including L.K. Advani, M.M. Joshi, Uma Bharti, and 18 others in the Babri Masjid demolition case.
The apex court also reserved its order on the CBI’s request that their trial be transferred from a court in Rae Bareli to a special court in Lucknow.
Pointing out that the 25-year pendency was an “evasion of justice,” the bench comprising Justices P.C. Ghose and R.F. Nariman said it would direct the Lucknow court to complete the trial in two years by ordering a day-to-day hearing, thereby indicating that it was inclined to allow joint trial and revival of the conspiracy charge.
Mr Advani and others could get jail terms of up to five years if the conspiracy charge is proved in the joint trial.
The CBI chargesheet had alleged that a secret meeting took place at the residence of Vinay Katiyar on the eve of the demolition during which the final decision to raze the disputed structure was taken. The conspiracy hatched in 1990 by Mr Advani and others culminated in the demolition, the CBI said, and added that the conspiracy charge was dropped on technical grounds and should be revived.
There are two sets of cases relating to the demolition of the disputed structure on December 6, 1992. The first involves unnamed karsevaks, facing conspiracy and other serious criminal charges, the trial for which is taking place in a Lucknow court, while the second set of cases relates to the VVIPs in a Rae Bareli court.
Haji Mahboob Ahmad, who filed a writ petition, questioned the dropping of the conspiracy charge against Mr Advani and others. He argued that the 21 accused including Dr Joshi, Vinay Katiyar, Ashok Singhal and Giriraj Kishore, were the persons who participated in the demolition of the Babri Masjid in December 1992. But the trial court discharged them from the charge of conspiracy and this order was affirmed by the Allahabad high court on technical grounds. Contending that the order to drop conspiracy charges was bad in law, he sought a direction to quash the high court order.
The bench of Justice P.C. Ghose and R.F. Nariman made it clear to the counsel that since 25 years had already passed, in the interest of justice to all, the matter should be heard in one court, preferably in Lucknow by including conspiracy charge against all the 21 accused and kar sevaks. Other leaders included are Uma Bharti, Dr Joshi, Vinay Katiyar, Sadhvi Ritambara, Giriraj Kishore and Vishnu Hari Dalmia.
When senior advocate K.K. Venugopal, appearing for Mr Advani and Mr Joshi, objected to this, the Bench said, “We will use our extraordinary powers under Article 142 of the Constitution to transfer the Babri Masjid demolition related trial in Rae Bareilly to a Lucknow court, where the CBI filed a composite chargesheet by including conspiracy and other serious criminal charges against lakhs of unknown kar sevaks for the demolition of the Babri Masjid.”
Justice Ghose told the counsel, “A person should not suffer litigation for 25 years. In your own interest, the trial must come to an end and it is for your betterment. Why should it be kept pending for 25 years.”
Referring to argument that transfer of the pending case from Rae Barelly to Lucknow court would violate fundamentals right under Article 21 (fair trial), Justice Nariman said “transfer from one court to another court is a complete procedural issue, we are not violating any of your rights. We have power to transfer from one court to another as it is a technical ground on which it was not done. Justice Ghose described the delay as an “evasion of justice” and said, “We will direct the trial to be completed in two years. There will be day-to-day hearing.”
On the delay Justice Nariman said, “How many of the accused are dead and some will die now.” As far as the Rae Bareilly case is concerned, the court has examined 57 witnesses and have to examine another 105. In Lucknow, in the case against kar sevaks, 195 witnesses had been examined and 800 witnesses are yet to be examined.
Mr Venugopal pointed out that the Allahabad high court had set aside the transfer of the Rae Bareilly case to Lucknow in February 2001. The SC had accepted the UP government’s decision to continue the trial separately in Rae Bareilly. A transfer of the Rae Bareilly trial to Lucknow would negate all the past orders.
ASG Kaul argued that the high court order of 2001 had said that a prima facie case of conspiracy has been made out against the leaders and it still stood against them. When the Bench wanted to know the practical problems in having a joint trial in Lucknow, Mr Kaul said witnesses would have to be recalled and the trial may have to start “de novo (afresh)”. Kapil Sibal, appearing for one of the intervenors, however, said that the trial need not start afresh.
