Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate A Y Dave, referred the matter to the High Court after some of the accused opposing Amin's plea for becoming an approver, raised questions about its constitutional validity. The court said it did not have powers to decide on the constitutional validity of Amin's application and the matter has, therefore, been referred to the High Court.
During the arguments, lawyers representing eight accused, including another police officer D G Vanzara, who are opposing Amin's plea, had raised questions about the constitutional validity of Amin's plea under section 306 of CrPC seeking pardon.
S B Vakil, representing the eight accused, cited a number of Supreme Court orders in order to substantiate his contention that Amin's plea was constitutionally not valid.
He also argued that the present court did not have any jurisdiction to record the statement of Amin under section 164 of the CrPC, which is the first step towards deciding on a person becoming approver.
The court said that after the High Court decides on the constitutional validity of the application, further hearing on it would take place. The next hearing of the case is scheduled on September 6. Amin had last month filed an application in the court to become approver and had also asked the court to grant him pardon in the case under section 306 of Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC).
Eight accused in the fake encounter case including suspended IPS officers Vanzara, Dinesh M N and Rajkumar Pandiyan have objected to Amin turning approver. Amin, who is at present lodged in Sabarmati jail along with other accused of the fake encounter case, was Assistant Commissioner of Police (ACP), city crime branch, before being arrested in 2007 based on the statement of a witness involved in the operation of abducting Sohrabuddin and his wife Kausarbi.
His application to turn approver, came one day after CBI arrested former Gujarat Minister of State for Home Amit Shah in the fake encounter case on July 25.