Moving an application in the court of special judge J K Pandya, Pranesh's father Gopinath Pillai, who was added as a respondent on the order of the CBI court, said Pandey's discharge would "obstruct the uncovering of the conspiracy".
"Pandey's discharge will obstruct the uncovering of the conspiracy to murder the present respondent's son and others, and will hinder the trial court from arriving at the true facts," the application said.
He said Pandey had "not denied" any knowledge of the incident in his discharge application.
"There are legal evidences which are more than a strong suspicion and therefore, grounds to frame charges and proceed with the trial," Gopinath said.
The court posted the matter for December 16.
An FIR was registered against Pandey and others in December, 2011 and a charge sheet was filed against him by the CBI on July 3, 2013 for murder, criminal conspiracy and other charges under various sections of IPC and the Arms Act.
Pandey had moved the discharge plea last December, saying that the statements of two witnesses against him were contradictory.
He had also cited his reinstatement and promotion as incharge DGP (he resigned in April this year following the Supreme Court's reservation against him) as one of the grounds for seeking his discharge.
He had claimed that none of the 105 witnesses examined by the court named him in the fake encounter case.
Pandey had also said that he should be discharged as he did not have any "direct or indirect involvement in the case," and that the court had not yet taken supplementary charge sheet on record.
Arguing against Pandey's discharge plea, the CBI had told the court that the agency had enough evidence against him.
In the first charge sheet filed by the CBI in 2013, seven Gujarat police officers were named as accused, including IPS officers P P Pandey, D G Vanzara and G L Singhal who are facing charges for kidnapping, murder and conspiracy.
Pandey is facing charges of murder (section 302), criminal conspiracy (section 120(B)), abettor present when crime is committed (section 114), and sections of the Arms Act.
The city crime branch had then said that those killed in the encounters were Lashker-e-Taiba (LeT) terrorists who had landed in Gujarat to kill then chief minister Narendra Modi.
The SIT constituted by the Gujarat High Court had concluded that it was not a genuine encounter as the four were first abducted, held illegally and then murdered in cold blood.
Disclaimer: No Business Standard Journalist was involved in creation of this content
You’ve reached your limit of {{free_limit}} free articles this month.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
Already subscribed? Log in
Subscribe to read the full story →
Smart Quarterly
₹900
3 Months
₹300/Month
Smart Essential
₹2,700
1 Year
₹225/Month
Super Saver
₹3,900
2 Years
₹162/Month
Renews automatically, cancel anytime
Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans
Exclusive premium stories online
Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors


Complimentary Access to The New York Times
News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic
Business Standard Epaper
Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share


Curated Newsletters
Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox
Market Analysis & Investment Insights
In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor


Archives
Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997
Ad-free Reading
Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements


Seamless Access Across All Devices
Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app
