Menu
blogid : 8093 postid : 709553

3 QUESTIONS AGAINST MODI

VISION FOR ALL

  • 271 Posts
  • 28 Comments

3 QUESTIONS AGAINST MODI
…………………………

1.NO CLEAN CHIT TO NAREDRA MODI

What we understand clean chit is not actually the clean chit.The Metropolitan Magistrate Of Ahmedabad has acquitted Modi on the ground of the lack of evidences.Many Judgements have been delivered by the Supreme Court and the High Courts which clearly state that one who is acquitted on the ground of the lack of evidences is not clean.
You ought to observe the Section 3 of the Indian Evidence Act,1872 which defines Proved,Unproved and Disproved Facts.Proved Fact is that which is found true.Disproved fact is that which is found false.Unproved fact is that which is neither found true,nor found false due to the lack of evidences.The allegation imposed against Modi was unproved and when the fact remains unproved then the accused is acquitted but not given clean chit.Actually Clean Chit is that condition of judgement where the evidences and witnesses are proved false after trial or investigation.The SIT never told that the evidences and witnesses are false.The SIT only told that there is no competent evidences to further proceed in the case.If there is lack of evidences then a lot of reasons can be counted for the lack of evidences .As Modi was the CM,so not a single independent witness dared to speak against him.

2.The Case was Disposed Of Ex Parte

Zakia Zafri had filed Protest Petition against the Investigation Report Of SIT.There are some legal procedures to deal with the Protest Petition in exercise of the power to a Magistrate conferred under sections 190,200 and 202 of the CrPC.A Magistrate can take cognizance of a complaint under section 190 of the CrPC.Protest Petition is also a complaint filed by the informant against the Charge Sheet Of the Investigating Agency.Under section 200 of the CrPC,the Magistrate has to examine the complainant and its witnesses if the complaint and statements of the witnesses would not have been filed in written with Affidavit.Zakia Zafri would have filed Protest Petition alongwith Statements of the witnesses with affidavits,so there would be no need to examine the complainant and its witnesses in exercise of the power conferred under section 200 of the CrPC.Modi was accused of one of the Conspirator Of Gulbarg Society Riot where murder had occured.The allegation was exclusively triable by the Court Of Session.Under section 202(2) of the CrPC,the Magistrate shall examine the complainant and its witnesses if the allegation appears to be Exclusively Triable by the Court Of Session.So ,the Metropolitan Magistrate ought to have examined the complainant and witnesses which the learned Magistrate didn’t because the allegation against Modi was Exclusively Triable by the Court Of Session.

3.Witnesses were Declared Prejudiced without the reasonable Ground

Section 155 of the Indian Evidence Act,1872 provides in what conditions the witnesses can be impeached or stated false.Those who were Witnesses against Modi were declared prejudiced and old enemy of Modi by the SIT and the same logic was accepted by the Metropolitan Magistrate.Firstly,it should be noted that those who were witnesses against Modi were exploited/victimized by Modi. Sanjeev Bhatt and such other exploited people/victims were witnesses.How an exploited people /victim can be stated enemy? If this logic is accepted throughout the country then all accused will be acquitted because each exploited people/victim is stated enemy of the accused or at least prejudiced. Secondly,it should be noted that there is no provision in section 155 of the Indian Evidence Act,1872 or any other sections where the witnesses can be impeached on the ground of the old enemity or without proving the reason of prejudices.Old Enemity and otherwise prejudices can be a ground for the acquittal of the accused if the witnesses are challenged and proved false.Witnesses against Modi were not challenged and proved false,so there was the reasonable ground to proceed further and exercise trial against the said accused i.e.Modi.
……………………….
One American Survey Agency has shown wave in the favour of BJP by an Opinion Poll..But one question always raise what are the grounds of the survey?Collecting a little data and concluding a vast data is not perfect…If Indian Survey Agencies are corrupt as Disclosed by News Express then why the American survey Agencies can’t be corrupt? Republican Candidate Meet Romney was shown getting more vote than Obama but Obama won the election…It clearly proves that Republican Party had given bribe to such survey agencies to show wave in the favour of the Republican Party…Top 11 Indian Survey Agencies have accepted before the Camera that they manufacture and manipulate the data after taking money from a party and increase/decrease the seats..BJP is totally involved in giving bribe to such survey agencies,so the data in favour of BJP are shown in very exaggerated form and that’s why BJP is still favouring Opinion Poll…It is now clear by the sting Operation that Survey Agencies are manufacturing data by taking money then why BJP is still favouring….Ex-Chief Election Commissioner like S Y Quraissi and K J Rao has already demanded to ban the Opinion Poll but BJP is making an excuse by referring to right to freedom of expression…Now almost all top Survey Agencies Of India have accepted before camera that they are manipulating and manufacturing data,then why BJP is still favouring…So,it is totally clear that BJP is being benefited by the Survey Agencies,so BJP is favouring them…Opinion Poll conducted by Yogendra Yadav in favour of the AAP was also corrupt and manufactured by Yogendra Yadav ….Opinion Poll shown in favour of Congress was also manufactured and manipulated….One of the BJP leader was saying that if Opinion Poll is wrong then why the election result is same like the result shown by Opinion Poll..It’s so because voter thinks that the party who is getting more seats in opinion poll is going to win and thus a voter casts vote in the favour of that party after seeing the wave in favour of that party without taking decision on merit…
……………………….

Read Comments

Post a comment

Leave a Reply