Raghav_12 Posted May 20, 2014 Posted May 20, 2014 Are there any cases against them ? was there a case against Modi? Was he named in FIR?
gattaca Posted May 20, 2014 Posted May 20, 2014 I know where you are going so make your point and you will realize why/how it is flawed. This clean chit business has been misrepresented to public by Modi bhakts. Going by that logic, courts haven't found evidences of corruption against 99% of the politician, does that mean 99% of them are non-corrupt. He clearly states courts haven't found evidences of corruption against 99% of the politician. It means they have cases against them. I am asking if there any cases. Making percentages out of thin air win will support his argument.
Crookbond Posted May 20, 2014 Posted May 20, 2014 was there a case against Modi? Was he named in FIR? Poora mazaa kidkidaa kar diya :headshake:
veer Posted May 20, 2014 Posted May 20, 2014 Damn.. just saw Modi's speech to BJP house... says all the right things.. right intentions.. right values.. right vision.. lets see how he gets others support.. Let the Hard Work begin folks... !!!
bulbul Posted May 20, 2014 Posted May 20, 2014 :facepalm: The acceptance of the SIT report has no correlation with the judgment of the case. I can "accept" the report but reject the conclusions and make a verdict in favor of the plaintiff. And btw, since you swear on the SIT report please note that the same report says many objectionable things about Modi and his behavior during the 2002 riots. You can't have it both ways. Like I said earlier, there is no phrase "clean chit" in the SIT report which I have read of. IF you find it, please link me to the relevant portion of it. What is clean chit?
gattaca Posted May 20, 2014 Posted May 20, 2014 I know where you are going so make your point and you will realize why/how it is flawed. It makes zero sense. Modi is investigated but the people you listed are not.
Crookbond Posted May 20, 2014 Posted May 20, 2014 Damn.. just saw Modi's speech to BJP house... says all the right things.. right intentions.. right values.. right vision.. lets see how he gets others support.. Let the Hard Work begin folks... !!! I confess, It was a very nice speech.
Crookbond Posted May 20, 2014 Posted May 20, 2014 What is clean chit? I don't know, never heard of that phrase in the SIT report. It makes zero sense. Modi is investigated but the people you listed are not. So? Modi is investigated because there it was necessary for him to be investigated. The people I mentioned are spotless clean and don't even need to be investigated.
bulbul Posted May 20, 2014 Posted May 20, 2014 I don't know, never heard of that phrase in the SIT report. So? Modi is investigated because there it was necessary for him to be investigated. The people I mentioned are spotless clean and don't even need to be investigated. So what is the problem now?
gattaca Posted May 20, 2014 Posted May 20, 2014 I don't know, never heard of that phrase in the SIT report. So? Modi is investigated because there it was necessary for him to be investigated. The people I mentioned are spotless clean and don't even need to be investigated. This clean chit business has been misrepresented to public by Modi bhakts. Going by that logic, courts haven't found evidences of corruption against 99% of the politician, does that mean 99% of them are non-corrupt. 99 % politicans are not investigated. He trying show courts in bad light to make his argument which is incorrect.
bulbul Posted May 20, 2014 Posted May 20, 2014 99 % politicans are not investigated. He trying show courts in bad light to make his argument which is incorrect. Actually MMS is big criminal as he presided over too many scams, very difficult to believe he didn't got any benefits or didn't know any of them.
Crookbond Posted May 20, 2014 Posted May 20, 2014 99 % politicans are not investigated. He trying show courts in bad light to make his argument which is incorrect. How is he showing the courts in bad light? The courts don't investigate!!!!
Crookbond Posted May 20, 2014 Posted May 20, 2014 So what is the problem now? The problem is the following - 1 person wrongly served 5 years in jail 1 person wrongly served 7 years in jail 4 people wrongly served 11 years in jail (2 were given death penalty) thanks to Modi's judgment as a Home Minister. I suppose you see nothing wrong in this.
bulbul Posted May 20, 2014 Posted May 20, 2014 The problem is the following - 1 person wrongly served 5 years in jail 1 person wrongly served 7 years in jail 4 people wrongly served 11 years in jail (2 were given death penalty) thanks to Modi's judgment as a Home Minister. I suppose you see nothing wrong in this. Those things happened every where...you cannot blame only one person...Not saying its not wrong, but its not isolated case. Now tell me what is the problem in SIT/SC regarding Modi.
coffee_rules Posted May 20, 2014 Posted May 20, 2014 SIT judges! What are you talking about? SIT is not a court, it is just an investigative team appointed by the SC. The SIT report is not defacto truth. Please post the plea and the SC judgment to the 2nd link. I would like to read what the plea was and what the SC was against. You must be knowledgeable enough on this topic to know that SC was not satisfied with the SIT report closure and had asked to include Amicus Curaie findings (which it did not in the end). The case hasn't gone to the SC as yet, heck it is not even in the HC. The report was only upheld in the magistrate court. Oh and FYI, here we are only talking about the SIT report in the Gulberg massacre case, There's another case from the Naroda Patiya massacre in which to my knowledge SIT has not even submitted its report since inception. This is the same case where Maya Kodnani was convicted after being let off by (hold your breath) the magistrate court. Earlier, you seemed to indicate SC had nothing to do with SIT, whereas it is formed by the SC. The case will not go to SC because the SIT has found no prosecutable evidence, no case hence clean chit. Also, Soon after the remark, the advocate who had filed the petition, decided to withdraw it and it was allowed by the court. Even the petition challenging the SIT report has been withdrawn. Hence all we have is a SIT appointed by the SC giving out a report claiming there is no prosecutable evidence. Hence SC it not even allowing a case with a FIR naming Modi. The matter is closed now
Crookbond Posted May 20, 2014 Posted May 20, 2014 Earlier, you seemed to indicate SC had nothing to do with SIT, whereas it is formed by the SC. The case will not go to SC because the SIT has found no prosecutable evidence, no case hence clean chit. Also, Even the petition challenging the SIT report has been withdrawn. Hence all we have is a SIT appointed by the SC giving out a report claiming there is no prosecutable evidence. Hence SC it not even allowing a case with a FIR naming Modi. The matter is closed now SIT is appointed by the SC - I never suggested otherwise. I think you are misinformed on the case not going to the SC; it will go to the SC because Zakia Jafri will keep on challenging it. I want to know exactly what the petition is about. You are confusing entities here - investigative agency, reports, courts and charge sheets. The acceptance of the SIT report by the magistrate court does not create any hindrance for another charge sheet or FIR.
Crookbond Posted May 20, 2014 Posted May 20, 2014 Those things happened every where...you cannot blame only one person...Not saying its not wrong, but its not isolated case. Now tell me what is the problem in SIT/SC regarding Modi. I am not the one doing the blame, the SC is - read it! On one hand, you say MMS should be held guilty for wrongdoings happened under him but when it comes to Modi - it happens everywhere and other hazaar excuses. SC has not mentioned anything about Modi in the Gulberg massacre case; it has not reached its door. The SC has not accepted the SIT report but merely sent it to the magistrate court for consideration. Don't for a second use the word SIT/SC interchangeably here.
bulbul Posted May 20, 2014 Posted May 20, 2014 I am not the one doing the blame' date=' the SC is - read it! On one hand, you say MMS should be held guilty for wrongdoings happened under him but when it comes to Modi - [i']it happens everywhere and other hazaar excuses. SC has not mentioned anything about Modi in the Gulberg massacre case; it has not reached its door. The SC has not accepted the SIT report but merely sent it to the magistrate court for consideration. Don't for a second use the word SIT/SC interchangeably here. I gave MMS example just because you said he is clean..i am not blaming MMS here.. Again no comments against SC as well...the cases you mentioned happens across the world, unless its proved intentional you cannot give it as a example & tell that's Gujarat model etc.
FischerTal Posted May 20, 2014 Posted May 20, 2014 This thread looks incredibly stupid When SC concurs with Gujarat high court and lower courts in other cases, does that mean that the courts are still incompetent?
Recommended Posts