Sohrabuddin case: Supreme Court says it will not reopen Amit Shah's discharge but seeks CBI reply on plea against acquittal of others

The Supreme Court on Monday issued notice on an appeal challenging the acquittal of all 22 accused, including 21 police personnel, in the case registered on allegations that Sohrabuddin Shaikh, his wife Kauser Bi and associate Tulsiram Prajapati were killed in a fake encounter by the Gujarat police.

A Bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana sought the response of the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) which investigated the matter, as well as the 22 persons who were acquitted in the case.

Notably, the Court clarified that Union Home Minister Amit Shah’s 2014 discharge from the case will not be reopened.

“We hope that you are not assailing paragraph 43 (of a Bombay High Court judgment which rejected an application questioning Shah's discharge) or reopening a discharge that has become final (by an order passed by the Supreme Court),” said Justice Bagchi.

CJI Kant agreed.

“We would like to see some of the witnesses statements … as far as the acquittal part is concerned. But para 43, as my brother has pointed out, no question it being reopened," he said.

"But the persons who were put on trial, whether there was a fair and just trial (that will be examined)," Justice Bagchi added.

The Court also expressed concerns that 92 witnesses had turned hostile during the trial.

“(It) is a matter of concern. 92 witness. In a trial if 92 witnesses are turning hostile, it is serious concern," said Justice Bagchi.

The top court was dealing with a plea filed by Sohrabuddin Shaikh's brother, Rubabuddin, challenging the Bombay High Court's May 7 decision to confirm the acquittal of all the accused in the encounter case.

The case stemmed from an incident on November 23, 2005, when wanted criminal Sohrabuddin Shaikh was allegedly abducted alongside Kauser Bi and Prajapati from a luxury bus travelling from Hyderabad to Sangli.

The CBI claimed that Shaikh and Prajapati were later killed in staged encounters by police, while Kauser Bi was murdered and her body secretly disposed off.

The case was registered in Gujarat. However, on the CBI's request in 2012, it was transferred to Mumbai by the Supreme Court.

The trial was then presided over by multiple judges, including Judge BH Loya who died in 2014 mid-trial, and judge MB Gosavi, who discharged Shah from the case in December 2014.

The High Court and the Supreme Court later upheld Shah's discharge from the case.

The High Court on May 7 this year again dismissed an application challenging Shah's discharge. The Supreme Court today indicated that it was not inclined to re-examine the High Court's findings on this aspect.

On December 21, 2018, special CBI Judge SJ Sharma acquitted all 22 accused, which included serving and retired policemen from Gujarat, Rajasthan, and Andhra Pradesh.

210 witnesses were examined but the prosecution's case collapsed when 92 of them turned hostile.

In his 358-page judgment, the trial judge expressed sympathy for the deceased's family but cited severe lack of conclusive evidence. The judge added that the accused could not be convicted strictly on moral or suspicion grounds.

Shaikh's brothers, Rubabuddin and Nayabuddin, then challenged the trial court ruling before the High Court through appeals filed in 2019. The CBI, on the other hand, told the High Court that it accepted the verdict and had not taken a call to challenge it in appeal.

The High Court reserved its verdict in 2025. In May this year, the High Court upheld the trial court's acquittal judgment. This has now been challenged before the Supreme Court by Rubabuddin.

Senior Advocate Dama Seshadri Naidu appeared for Rubabuddin Shaikh and told the Court,

"The (petitioner’s) brother, his wife and his friend - they have been done away with in a cold-blooded manner. Because my brother was a bit critical of the police and its attitude ... When pitted against the police, some of the witnesses may have turned hostile."

Senior Advocate K Parameswar represented some of the acquitted persons and submitted that this case involves well-reasoned concurrent findings by the trial court and the High Court, which should not be disturbed.

“There has been a fair trial without impairing anybody’s right. We’ll waive formal notice, we will assist the Court," he said.

The Court, meanwhile, maintained that it wanted to examine witness statements in the case, to satisfy itself that there has been a fair trial. The Bench observed that this needs to be done since witnesses in this case appear to have turned hostile "wholesale."

The Court also suggested that counsel on both sides of the matter submit the witness statements that they would be relying on to back up their arguments.

Meanwhile, Senior Advocate Naidu said that Nayabuddin Shaikh has also filed an appeal in the matter, which had yet to be listed on account of some defects in the petition. He requested the Court to tag both appeals.