The Times of India:Friday, January 20, 2012.
AHMEDABAD: The Gujarat high court on Thursday asked city police to file a final report against Gujarat University vice-chancellor Parimal Trivedi in connection with a four-year old caste-profiling case.
A faculty in a city college, Pankaj Shrimali had lodged an FIR against the VC accusing him of hurling castiest remarks in May 2008. The VC immediately moved HC to get the FIR quashed, but remained unsuccessful and has been facing the probe since then.
The cops never called the VC for interrogation and tried to cover up the issue by filing (A) summary report, meaning thereby the accused was not available. A magisterial court refused to accept the closure report and ordered the police for further probe in 2010.
The investigating agency became inactive once again, and this led Shrimali to move the HC with the complaint against deliberate police inaction. Finally when the HC sought replies from concerned authorities, it was revealed that the DySP of the SC/ST Cell, who is the Investigating Officer in the case, had proposed to charge sheet Trivedi and even sought permission to seek his remand after arrest. However, the higher ups advised for filing (B) summary, which means the complaint is false.
Shrimali objected to this during the proceeding before HC and highlighted that the IO, after due procedure of investigation, had proposed to file charge sheet. He also alleged that there was huge political pressure to shield the VC, as one after the other the witnesses turned hostile, barring another faculty, Pardeep Prajapati.
After the hearing, the HC directed the police to file an appropriate report within 15 days in this case. "The IO's proposal has revealed that the VC was to be charge-sheeted, and we have got authenticated copy of the document received under the provisions of the RTI Act. Besides, the high court decided to monitor the case now because it has been four years since I lodged the complaint. The law provides for 30 days in filing investigation report in atrocity-related cases," Shrimali said.
Justice J C Upadhyay has kept monitoring of the proceeding with him, as the Investigating Officer has been asked to submit a status report in the high court by February 21.
A faculty in a city college, Pankaj Shrimali had lodged an FIR against the VC accusing him of hurling castiest remarks in May 2008. The VC immediately moved HC to get the FIR quashed, but remained unsuccessful and has been facing the probe since then.
The cops never called the VC for interrogation and tried to cover up the issue by filing (A) summary report, meaning thereby the accused was not available. A magisterial court refused to accept the closure report and ordered the police for further probe in 2010.
The investigating agency became inactive once again, and this led Shrimali to move the HC with the complaint against deliberate police inaction. Finally when the HC sought replies from concerned authorities, it was revealed that the DySP of the SC/ST Cell, who is the Investigating Officer in the case, had proposed to charge sheet Trivedi and even sought permission to seek his remand after arrest. However, the higher ups advised for filing (B) summary, which means the complaint is false.
Shrimali objected to this during the proceeding before HC and highlighted that the IO, after due procedure of investigation, had proposed to file charge sheet. He also alleged that there was huge political pressure to shield the VC, as one after the other the witnesses turned hostile, barring another faculty, Pardeep Prajapati.
After the hearing, the HC directed the police to file an appropriate report within 15 days in this case. "The IO's proposal has revealed that the VC was to be charge-sheeted, and we have got authenticated copy of the document received under the provisions of the RTI Act. Besides, the high court decided to monitor the case now because it has been four years since I lodged the complaint. The law provides for 30 days in filing investigation report in atrocity-related cases," Shrimali said.
Justice J C Upadhyay has kept monitoring of the proceeding with him, as the Investigating Officer has been asked to submit a status report in the high court by February 21.
.JPG)
.JPG)
