NEW DELHI, September 3; Through a sting operation, independent journalist Pushp Sharma on Monday claimed to have exposed an alleged conspiracy by some BJP leaders to subvert the course of justice in the case against the former Gujarat Home Minister, Amit Shah, in the case of killing of Tulsiram Prajapati in 2006.
The journalist alleged that the BJP leaders, including MPs Prakash Javadekar and Bhupendra Yadav, had conspired to get blank vakalatnamas executed by Tulsiram’s mother Narmadabai to plant their own lawyer on her behalf and weaken the case against Mr. Shah. Tulsiram was a witness in the alleged custodial killing of Sohrabuddin Sheikh in November 2005.
Mr. Sharma has moved a public interest litigation petition in the Supreme Court through his advocate Kamini Jaiswal, seeking a CBI inquiry and action against the accused for obstruction of justice, and protection for himself and Narmadabai.
The sting operation supposedly revealed that multiple vakalatnamas were obtained from Narmadabai through the journalist. “I know Mr. Javadekar for the past six years. In January 2012, he asked me to arrange a meeting of some lawyers with Narmadabai to facilitate payment of compensation to her by the Gujarat government. Since it was a noble cause, I volunteered. In June last year, at the official residence of Mr. Javadekar, I was told that I had to get vakalatnamas executed by Narmadabai for processing the compensation,” Mr. Sharma said at a press conference.
Suspecting that something was amiss, Mr. Sharma then decided to secretly record the developments. “I was introduced to an Indore-based lawyer who sent a subordinate along with me to Narmadabai’s residence in Ujjain. He got her thumb imprints on multiple blank vakalatnamas,” he alleged.
Lawyer Prashant Bhushan said: “It is evident from the transcripts that those who were in the legal defence team of Amit Shah desperately wanted the multiple blank vakalatnamas. Prima facie, it appears to be an attempt to derail investigations and the trial. They had also obtained vakalatnamas for the High Court and the Supreme Court and could have used them at any stage in various ways to weaken the case.”
Mr. Bhushan said that although CBI counsel would pursue the case, if the BJP came to power at the Centre, the agency would be under its control. “The only person to oppose any dilution in the prosecution’s case would be the complainant. But then, they could have got their own lawyer appointed on her behalf using these vakalatnamas.”
Refuting the allegations, Mr. Javadekar said: “I have learnt that they have gone to court. If the court takes cognisance, we will reply.”
Claiming that there was nothing incriminating against him in the recorded conversations, Mr. Yadav said: “I am told that he [Mr. Sharma] was earlier arrested by the Delhi Police in an extortion case.”
In the petition, Mr. Sharma submitted that he had previously carried out a “Rent a Riot” sting operation exposing how riots could be engineered for a price, which won him an award from the International Press Institute, Vienna. He also exposed the shoddy probe by the Uttarakhand Police into the disappearance of Swami Shankar Dev, the guru of Baba Ramdev. This led to a CBI probe.
He alleged that he was implicated in false cases, including the one registered by the Delhi Police after his sting operation against the force at the Najafgarh station. That case is pending trial for the past four years.
