Who Got Shivani Killed?

May be A Ghost -State of

Emergency/Dictatorship-For Speaking Truth Face Police Action
Mr Ashok Arora a well-known lawyer and former secretary Supreme Court Bar
Association renounced lucrative law practice at the peak of his career to dedicate his
life for serving the cause of humanity. Feeling concerned about the miseries of crores
of fellow human beings going to bed empty stomach, he entrusted his hard earned
properties, body, mind and soul to fight for justice. He always took bold stand on
many issues including injustice done in Jessica Murder Case. Recently he again took a
bold stand and spoke against grave injustice done in Shivani Bhatnagar case. He has
been issued contempt notice by the High Court and the system is so vindictive that he
is being threatened with police action. Imagine if millions using emails are booked for
criminal offence just because the contents are not to the liking of rich and powerful.
The democracy is surely in danger.
We should all stand united to protect democracy and right of freedom of speech. Truth
should not be made to suffer under any circumstances. We should appeal to The Chief
Justice of Delhi High Court to withdraw judicial work form Justice Badar Ahmed for
writing a shocking judgment and adjourn the contempt proceeding till the Supreme
Court gives it final verdict in Shivani murder case. The Police should be directed not
to threaten citizens for writing truth. Abuse of Information Technology Act should
immediately be stopped.
Last week High Court of Delhi reversed the well written judgment delivered by
session judge vide which he had convicted IPS Ravi Kant Sharma and others for
conspiracy to kill Shivani Bhatnagar, a famous journalist in the year 1999. In such an
open and shut case where the learned session judge found overwhelming
circumstances to convict the accused for a cold-blooded murder Justice Ahmed wrote
just two cryptic paragraphs to reverse the reasoned finding written in 164 pages.
Martin Luther King said it so profoundly that injustice anywhere is threat to justice
everywhere. If courts acquit high profile criminals the democracy is surely in danger.
Unscrupulous people will be encouraged to commit crimes if they are sure of
acquittal.
In this judgment Justice Badar Ahmed took ten and half months to write just two
paragraphs to reverse a well-written judgment by the trial judge who discussed all the
facts and the law settled by Supreme Court with regard to motive, conspiracy and
circumstantial evidence. Three retired judges of Delhi High Court Justice JD Kapoor,
Justice Sodhi & Justice Dhingra confirm how badly the judgment has been written.
They all are known for their profound knowledge of criminal law and are known for
making bold statements in public interest.
Prosecution gave a list of twenty odd circumstances, which were clear proof of
motive, conspiracy and guilt of Ravi Kant and others. Intimacy of accused Ravi kant
with the deceased, 73 calls by Ravi Kant to the deceased and 58 calls by the deceased
to Ravi Kant in a short span, his subsequent withdrawal, false defence that she was a
family friend, evidence of Shivanis friend Sejal Shah and his sister Sevanti about her
feeling dejected and her threatening to expose Ravi Kant according to Learned trial
judge provided sufficient motive, which was ignored by Justice Ahmed. Ravi Kant
staying in Hotel Ashoka and his meeting before the incident with other accused where
he called Shivani also, his making phone calls to his daughter and Dr form the phone

of one of the accused at the same time, his going to Pune and using his friends SIM
and phone to make calls to other accused, the same friend making statement under
section 164 Cr. PC to this effect, his proved relationship with other accused, after the
incident accused talking to each other and informing Ravi Kant, many of them
identifying the places form where the calls were made, the very next day of murder
other accused going to Mumbai to meet Ravi Kant and take the ransom money,
staying in hotel there, making calls to Ravi Kant from the hotel, Ravi Kants guard
identifying the accused having visited him after the murder, an IPS officer absconding
for more than two months, abusing his influence and power to obstruct the
investigation for three years, his repeated avoidance before investigation and
competent authority for conduct of polygraph test, his self destructive defence and the
accused Pradeep Sharma being a hired assailant were the circumstances amongst
others, which gave sufficient reason to a wise and honest judge to observe, The
circumstances established on the record are intertwined
intrinsically. Same if concatenated, form a chain which
give only inference that said accused were conspiring
each other.
The learned session judge ably assisted by prosecution lawyers SK Saxena & Manisha
relied upon a whole list of circumstances and settled law by the Supreme Court with
regard to motive, conspiracy, section 8(regarding conduct of accused), 10(act of any
accused to be relevant against all) and section 27(disclosure leading to recovery of
fact) of the Evidence Act, which were totally ignored by the High Court. There is not
even a word about a whole list of circumstances and the law of the land regarding
motive, conspiracy and circumstantial evidence in this judgment. High Court didnt
even bother to discuss the Supreme Court judgments cited by the learned standing
counsel and the trial court. Taking ten and half months to write just two cryptic
paragraphs is a good reason for prudence to raise eyebrows. One shivers to think that
it all happened, despite, knowing that Supreme Court will surely look into it.
Administration of justice will continue to suffer unless we impart spiritual training to
judges, lawyers and others involved in justice delivery system but unfortunately till
date no one has taken this most important issue seriously. Pure justice can be done
only by a pure soul. The knowledge of law only cannot help a soul to reach a just
decision. The capacity to see through and the strength to withstand unscrupulous
pressures can never be developed just by studying laws in India and Oxford.