Not Enough Evidence to Prosecute Amit Shah?

Even by the plummeting standards set in the last few months, the decision of the special CBI (Central Bureau of Investigation) court in discharging Amit Shah (accused number 16 in the second charge sheet; accused number one in the third charge sheet) in the Sohrabuddin encounter case seems outrageous. The special CBI court, without waiting for even the trial to commence, without weighing the evidence at length, seems to have suddenly concurred with the defence and the ruling party’s view that Amit Shah was caught in a political trap. Why this impatience with the process of the trial? Shah is no ordinary accused, or accessory with a side role: he is accused of being the “kingpin” or the mastermind of the triple murder.

“The entire record considered in totality”, says the court, does not indicate Shah’s role, and hence it discharged him. However, what is the entire record? Even a simple, cursory look suggests that in fact it is not hearsay but solid evidence of call-detail records, witness statements recorded under Sections 161 and 164 of the CrPC (Code of Criminal Procedure), as well as evidence of systematic and direct interference by Shah in the state CID (Crime Investigation Department) probe into the encounter. If the call detail records were totally insignificant and proved nothing, why was there such a concerted effort to suppress all such information that pointed to Shah’s role?