Frame charges against Babri trio as well -- CBI tells court

Frame charges against Babri trio as well -- CBI tells court
MANOJ MITTA

NEW DELHI, FEBRUARY 24: The CBI has put the Centre and the BJP in a fix by urging the special trial court in Lucknow to frame charges in the Ayodhya demolition case against all the 48 accused, including the three Cabinet ministers.

In an oral submission, CBI’s counsel P K Chaubey made such a plea yesterday when the case came up for hearing before the special court for the first time since the Allahabad High Court upheld its chargesheet on February 12.

The implication of the CBI’s statement is that the special judge, Srikant Shukla, should summon and frame charges against L K Advani, Murli Manohar Joshi and Uma Bharati as well.

This is contrary to the stand taken by the BJP that on the basis of a procedural glitch pointed out the high court, the three ministers had been ‘‘exonerated’’ of all the charges.

The procedural glitch relates to one of the two FIRs, Nos 197 and 198, on which the CBI filed a consolidated chargesheet. The high court embargoed the special court from conducting any trial on FIR No 198 till the state government ‘‘cures’’ a defect in its notification.

The CBI argued that even if FIR No 198 is kept in abeyance, the special court should frame charges against all the accused named by the chargesheet. This is because the subject matter of FIR No 198, the CBI contended, is anyway covered by FIR No 197.

The CBI pointed out that FIR No 198 relates only to the provocative speeches delivered by eight leaders (including the three who are now ministers) from Ram Katha Kunj Manch, a makeshift dias in the vicinity of the Babri Masjid, on the fateful day of its demolition.

On the other hand, FIR No 197 has ‘‘a wider canvass’’ as it covers the demolition and the criminal conspiracy that led to it. The CBI’s chargesheet accuses the three ministers of having been part of the criminal conspiracy to demolish the mosque.

Another major argument of Chaubey was that if the special court refrains from summoning any of the accused, it would tantamount to that person being discharged. That would be violative of the high court verdict which upheld the CBI chargesheet.

The counsel for the three ministers, Mahipal Ahluwalia, sought to counter the CBI’s arguments by saying that after the high court verdict the chargesheet had become a ‘‘fractured’’ one. And that his clients could not be tried on the basis of such a chargesheet.

As a result of the dispute over the interpretation of the high court verdict, Shukla posted the case for further arguments on the issue on March 1. The legal status of the ministers will depend on the outcome of this dispute.