NEW DELHI: Faced with a curious petition that seeks reopening the investigation of the assassination of Mahatma Gandhi, the Supreme Court on Friday wondered why a case that was decided 68 years ago should be revisited now. But all the same it appointed senior advocate Amrender Sharan as amicus curiae to assist it in the matter.
The petition was filed by Mumbai-based Dr Pankaj Phadnis, a researcher and trustee of the right-wing group Abhinav Bharat. Phadnis claims that the conviction and hanging -- on Nov. 15, 1949 -- of Nathuram Godse and Narayan Apte for the assassination of Mahatma Gandhi was one of the biggest cover-ups in history.
He believes there was a third shooter involved, and that the trial was completed even before India’s Supreme Court came into being in 1950 without considering crucial evidence.
The division bench comprising justices S A Bobde and L Nageswara Rao were initially of the view that "nothing can be done in law" in the case that was decided that long ago. But they relented and asked Sharan, a former additional solicitor-general, to be the amicus curiae.
The next hearing of the case is on October 30.
After their initial hesitation, the judges kept the case open after the petitioner revealed that he has applied to the National Archives and Research Administration of the USA to declassify certain sensitive documents which might have a bearing on the case even today.
Petitioner Phadnis says one of the questions that needed to be investigated was whether the Office of Strategic Services (OSS), an intelligence agency of the US that later became the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) would have some information relating to the assassination.
Phadnis questioned the 'three bullet theory' relied upon by the courts to uphold the conviction of Godse and Apte, who were hanged, and Vinayak Damodar Savarkar who was given the benefit of doubt for lack of evidence.
Phadnis says there could have been a third assassin other than the Godse and Apte.
"What can we do now at this stage?" the bench asked. "Why should we reopen this now?"
Dr Phadnis referred to the report of the Justice J L Kapur Commission of Inquiry, set up in 1966, on the Gandhi assassination. He argued that appeals filed by the convicts were dismissed in 1949 by the East Punjab High Court, following which the Privy Council sent the matter back on the ground that the Supreme Court of India would come into existence in January 1950.
"The Supreme Court never adjudicated on this matter," Phadnis said and added that the Kapur Commission report never went to the apex court.
When he said that another person might have been involved in firing shots at Mahatma Gandhi, the bench said, "We want to go by the law and not by passion. You say that there was someone else, a third person. Is that person alive today to face the trial."
Responding to the query, Phadnis claimed that the assassination could have been carried out by an organised body named 'Force 136' (a British special intelligence unit).
To this thebenche said, "we cannot convict an organisation. Do you know whether that person is alive?"
Phadnis, however, said he did not know if that person was alive but a probe should be ordered to ascertain the truth.
The petitioner referred to a telegram sent from the US Embassy on January 30, 1948 and said that Herbert Tom Reiner, disbursing officer, was within five feet of Gandhi when he was shot, and with the aid of Indian guards, he had apprehended the assassin.
However, the bench said, "Is Reiner alive today?"
When Phadnis said Reiner had died recently, the bench said, "Then who will give evidence? Who is going to probe what Reiner saw?"
To this, he said, "the evidence are documented records" and forensic examination would establish how many shots were fired at Gandhi on that fateful day.