Sad letter day, says Congress

The party ‘respectfully disagrees’ with the Supreme Court’s judgment

April 19, 2018 11:02 pm | Updated 11:02 pm IST - NEW DELHI

Rahul Gandhi and Congress leaders after meeting President Ram Nath Kovind in March on the Loya case.

Rahul Gandhi and Congress leaders after meeting President Ram Nath Kovind in March on the Loya case.

The Congress on Thursday said it “respectfully disagreed with the conclusions arrive at” by the Supreme Court on the Judge B.H. Loya case as it had left many questions “unanswered”, and called it a “sad letter day” in India’s history.

While the principal Opposition party called for a thorough investigation into the circumstances surrounding Loya’s death, its president, Rahul Gandhi, made a direct attack on BJP president Amit Shah, who was cleared of all charges in the alleged fake encounter of Sohrabuddin Shaikh.

Impeachment motion

“Indians are deeply intelligent. Most Indians, including those in the BJP, instinctively understand the truth about Mr. Amit Shah. The truth has its own way of catching up with people like him,” Mr. Gandhi tweeted.

Sources told The Hindu that Leader of the Opposition in the Rajya Sabha, Ghulam Nabi Azad had called a meeting on Friday of Opposition parties who had previously supported the move to bring an impeachment motion against the Chief Justice of India.

For the record, the party took a cautious stance on the issue of moving an impeachment motion. “Today, I would like to restrict my comments only to the Supreme Court verdict in the Judge Loya case,” said the Congress’s communication head, Randeep Singh Surjewala.

Arguing for a criminal investigation, he said the Maharashtra government never placed “material documents and clinching evidence” before the top court.

“Issue of criminality or lack thereof can only be decided through an investigation. There has been no investigation till date in the death of Judge Loya. No one, without an investigation, can decide whether death is natural or not. Can statements of some judges made in an administrative enquiry before a police officer be the sole yardstick for arriving at a conclusion, more so when there is suspicion being raised by available forensic evidence, opinion of experts, documents, discrepancies and statements of various witnesses given to different organisations pointing towards a possible conspiracy,” he asked.

CPI(M) stand

The CPI(M) called for an independent investigation, and argued that the issue must be taken up by a larger Bench of the top court. “All circumstantial evidence suggest that this matter must be thoroughly probed to get to the bottom of it,” CPI(M) leader Sitaram Yechury said.

(With inputs from

Sobhana K. Nair

in Hyderabad)

0 / 0
Sign in to unlock member-only benefits!
  • Access 10 free stories every month
  • Save stories to read later
  • Access to comment on every story
  • Sign-up/manage your newsletter subscriptions with a single click
  • Get notified by email for early access to discounts & offers on our products
Sign in

Comments

Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.