![]() Tuesday, Jul 22, 2003 |
| National | ||||
|
News:
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Advts: Classifieds | Employment | Obituary | National
By Our Special Correspondent
December 6, 1992: First Information Report (FIR) 197/92 against unknown persons and 47 other cases registered at Ram Janma Bhoomi police station at Ayodhya. An FIR 198/92 also registered at Ram Janma Bhoomi police station. December 13, 1992: The FIR 197/92, relating to conspiracy, communal frenzy and rioting, transferred to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). August 27, 1993: The FIR 198/92, charge of conspiracy, did not figure in this case. It related to offences of inflammatory speeches, rioting, whipping up of communal frenzy, and 47 other cases transferred to the CBI. October 5, 1993: A composite chargesheet filed by the CBI in both 197/92 and 198/92 cases against 40 accused in the Special Court of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lucknow. January 1, 1996: A supplementary chargesheet filed by the CBI against nine more persons in Lucknow court. September 9, 1997: Charges framed against 49 accused by the Special Judge, Ayodhya Case, Lucknow. As many as 33 accused filed revision petition in Allahabad High Court. February 2, 2001: Allahabad High Court upheld the order of September 9, 1997 of the Special Judge but held the notification of October 8, 1993 issued by the Uttar Pradesh Government in respect of case no. 198/92 setting up a Special Court defective as there was no consultation with the High Court for issuing it. Cognisance, committal and order on framing charges in respect of 198/92 cited as bad in law. The court held that the defect could be rectified by issuing fresh notification by the State Government. June 16, 2001: The CBI requested the Uttar Pradesh Government to issue a fresh notification, curing the technical defect of having not consulted the High Court. The State Government did not issue a fresh notification to cure the defect neither did it file a Special Leave Petition (SLP), challenging the High Court order before the Supreme Court. February to July 2002: Special Leave Petitions (SLP), pleading for issue of notification and revival of trial in the Ayodhya case, filed in the Supreme Court by Mohammad Aslam Bhure, Society for Justice, Kuldip Nayar and Mohammad Hashim. September 2002: The Uttar Pradesh Government issued a notification specifying that Rae Bareli court would be the Special Court to try the case arising out of the FIR 198/92. This case, pending before the Lucknow court, will be transferred to Rae Bareli court. November 2002: The Supreme Court upheld the Uttar Pradesh Government's notification on Rae Bareli Special Court. May 31, 2003: The CBI filed a supplementary charge-sheet against L.K. Advani and seven others, including Murli Manohar Joshi, Uma Bharti, Vinay Katiyar and Ashok Singhal. The CBI report contained the statements of 39 witnesses, documents and press reports relating to the investigation of case No. 198/92.
Printer friendly
page
News:
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
|
|
|
The Hindu Group: Home | About Us | Copyright | Archives | Contacts | Subscription Group Sites: The Hindu | Business Line | The Sportstar | Frontline | The Hindu eBooks | Home |
Copyright © 2003, The
Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of
this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of
The Hindu
|