-
Social
-

The Sohrabuddin Sheikh murder: Why did Amit Shah become the “prime conspirator”?

By
BO Desk
Play / Stop Audio
Progress
October 23, 2024
In 2005, a significant case involving the deaths of Sohrabuddin Sheikh, his wife Kauser Bi, and his aide Tulsiram Prajapati rocked the political landscape of Gujarat. This case involved allegations against top police officials and Amit Shah, who at the time was Gujarat’s Minister of State for Home under the then Chief Minister, Narendra Modi. Let’s break down the events and understand both sides of the story.

The encounter and initial allegations

In November 2005, Sohrabuddin Sheikh, who was reportedly involved in extortion and smuggling, was traveling from Hyderabad to Maharashtra with his wife Kauser Bi. They were allegedly abducted by the Gujarat and Rajasthan police and later killed in what was described as a “fake encounter.” His wife was also allegedly raped by a constable and later disappeared. 

Police claimed that Sheikh was linked to Pakistan’s terror outfit Lashkar-e-Taiba and had plans to assassinate Narendra Modi, but a Supreme Court-monitored investigation later revealed this was false.

The case took another turn when Tulsiram Prajapati, the only witness to Sheikh’s death, was killed in a similar encounter in December 2006 while in police custody. These deaths, and the nature of the police actions, led to accusations of conspiracy, primarily against Amit Shah and senior police officers like DG Vanzara, Rajkumar Pandian, and Dinesh MN.

Evidence against Amit Shah

During the investigation, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) discovered phone records showing regular communication between Shah and the police officers involved in the encounters. This close contact, especially during key developments in the case, was considered “uncommon” by investigators. They questioned why a state minister would be in such frequent communication with officers of lower ranks rather than higher-ranking officials.

In 2010, after years of investigation, the CBI arrested Amit Shah for 13 days. He was charged with destruction of evidence and conspiracy but was released on bail. The case was transferred to Mumbai to avoid political influence, and during this time, Shah's communication with police officers became a central focus.

The mysterious death of Judge Loya

More key events that raised suspicion and concern occurred when the CBI special court’s trial judge, JT Utpat, was suddenly transferred just a day before the judgement. 

He was then replaced by Judge Brijgopal Loya, who was supposed to preside over the case but died under mysterious circumstances. He had been scheduled to deliver a verdict in the case shortly before his death, which led to widespread speculation. His replacement, Judge MB Gosavi, discharged Amit Shah from the case later that year, stating that the charges were politically motivated and that the evidence, including the call records, was weak.

Several Public Interest Litigations (PILs) were filed to investigate Loya's death, but in 2018, the Supreme Court dismissed the petitions, concluding that there was no substantial evidence to warrant further investigation.

In January, the Bombay Lawyers Association filed a PIL in the Bombay High Court to investigate the mysterious death of Judge Loya. However, new petitions were soon taken up by the Supreme Court. On January 12, four senior Supreme Court judges held a rare press conference where they questioned how certain cases were being listed in court, including the Loya case. As a result, Justice Arun Mishra, who was supposed to hear the case, stepped aside.

After that, Chief Justice Dipak Misra formed a new three-judge bench, including Justices AM Khanwilkar, DY Chandrachud, and himself, to handle the petitions. During the hearings, there were some heated exchanges between the lawyers on both sides. The Maharashtra government’s lawyers argued that they had already conducted a discreet police investigation into Loya’s death.

By March 16, the Supreme Court had reserved its judgment, and later, they dismissed the petitions. Justice Chandrachud noted that the arguments for reopening the case eventually "fell apart," and there wasn't enough evidence to continue probing Loya’s death.

Shah’s side of the story

From the beginning, Amit Shah has maintained that the charges against him were politically motivated. In the context of his arrest, his legal team argued that it was not unusual for a home minister to be in contact with police officers, especially in a state dealing with heightened security threats. His discharge from the case by the Mumbai court was based on the conclusion that the call records were not strong enough to prove his involvement in a conspiracy.

Furthermore, Shah’s supporters have pointed out that several police officers involved in the case were also released due to a lack of evidence, suggesting that the initial allegations may have been overblown.

The political angle

Interestingly, the case unfolded during a significant political transition. When Shah was arrested, the Congress-led UPA government was in power at the center, and by the time he was cleared of charges, the BJP had come into power. This has led to questions about whether the case was influenced by the changing political landscape, though these remain speculative.

The Sohrabuddin Sheikh case remains one of the most debated incidents in recent Indian political history. While Amit Shah has been cleared of all charges, and the courts have ruled in his favor, questions about the encounters, the evidence, and the timing of key events continue to linger. 

Despite these unresolved concerns, the case stands as a reminder of the complexity of law, politics, and justice in India.

Comments