<p>A bench comprising Justices D K Jain, Aftab Alam and P Sathasivam was hearing an application moved by the Centre for Justice and Peace, an NGO, seeking direction to stop the trial of the cases. The NGO has accused the SIT and its members of influencing witnesses. <br />While seeking a response from the Gujarat government, the bench said it would hear the case again on April 19 . <br /><br />The apex court also fixed April 28 for considering whether there was a need to continue with the SIT headed by former CBI director R K Raghavan in the wake of allegations levelled against it. <br /><br />Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for Gujarat, submitted that neither the state nor any other affected party, including the accused, were supplied with any documents on the basis of which the court was proceeding. Rohatgi alleged that the NGO approached the SC as the SIT had made adverse remarks against some of its office-bearers.<br /><br />Senior advocate Ram Jethmalani, who was appearing for one of the accused, also argued that the SC could not stay the proceedings at the trial court or disband the SIT without hearing the state government as it would be against the principle of criminal justice system.<br /><br />Senior advocate Harish Salve, who is assisting the court as an amicus curiae, also submitted that the trial should not be stopped as it would lead to unnecessary delay in completion of the proceedings. <br /></p>
<p>A bench comprising Justices D K Jain, Aftab Alam and P Sathasivam was hearing an application moved by the Centre for Justice and Peace, an NGO, seeking direction to stop the trial of the cases. The NGO has accused the SIT and its members of influencing witnesses. <br />While seeking a response from the Gujarat government, the bench said it would hear the case again on April 19 . <br /><br />The apex court also fixed April 28 for considering whether there was a need to continue with the SIT headed by former CBI director R K Raghavan in the wake of allegations levelled against it. <br /><br />Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for Gujarat, submitted that neither the state nor any other affected party, including the accused, were supplied with any documents on the basis of which the court was proceeding. Rohatgi alleged that the NGO approached the SC as the SIT had made adverse remarks against some of its office-bearers.<br /><br />Senior advocate Ram Jethmalani, who was appearing for one of the accused, also argued that the SC could not stay the proceedings at the trial court or disband the SIT without hearing the state government as it would be against the principle of criminal justice system.<br /><br />Senior advocate Harish Salve, who is assisting the court as an amicus curiae, also submitted that the trial should not be stopped as it would lead to unnecessary delay in completion of the proceedings. <br /></p>
