Assam Govt stressed that the High Court overlooked the crucial fact that two prosecution sanctions were submitted...
Digital Desk: The Supreme Court on Friday took a significant step by seeking a response from the concerned respondents regarding a plea challenging the Gauhati High Court's decision to overturn the Trial court's judgment in the case related to the Dhemaji Bomb Blast that occurred on August 15, 2004. This tragic incident resulted in the loss of ten children and three women.
The bench of justices, J K Maheshwari and Sudhanshu Dhulia, issued notices to the respondents on the petition against the Gauhati High Court. The High Court, on August 24, 2023, reversed the conviction of five accused, including ULFA members, namely Dipanjali Borgohain, Lila Gogoi, Jatin Dowari, Muhi Handique, and Hemen Gogoi, under various sections of the Indian Penal Code, Explosive Substances Act, and the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (UAPA).
Assam govt filed an appeal challenging the Gauhati High Court's judgment, emphasizing that the trial court's conviction, dated July 4, 2019, had held the accused responsible for the Dhemaji Bomb Blast.
Nalin Kohli, Senior Additional Advocate General for the State of Assam, argued the petition in the Supreme Court. He, along with other counsels, pointed out what they considered to be erroneous in the High Court's decision.
The petition highlighted the rejection of Jatin Dowari's confessional statement by the High Court, which was based on its retraction after an inordinate delay of ten years. The trial court had heavily relied on Dowari's confession while convicting the accused respondents.
Moreover, the plea argued that the High Court erred in observing that no prosecution sanction was granted under the UAPA Act. The State of Assam emphasized that prosecution sanction was duly granted under Section 10/13 of the UAPA Act in 2011, and the relevant documents were included in the trial record.
The Assam Government stressed that the High Court overlooked the crucial fact that two prosecution sanctions were submitted with the charge sheet, and no objections were raised by the accused respondents during the trial. Therefore, any objections raised at the appellate stage were deemed immaterial.
This case raises fundamental questions about the validity of the High Court's decision and the judicial process involved in overturning convictions related to a tragic event that claimed innocent lives. The Supreme Court's scrutiny and the arguments presented underscore the complexity and sensitivity of the legal proceedings surrounding the Dhemaji Bomb Blast case.
Leave A Comment