Contention of Dr. Phadnis that difference between three and four shots was material, was accepted. However, Amicus Curiae appointed by the Supreme Court of India rejected four bullet theory relying only on the evidence of the Eye witness records produced in the Trial Court. He offered no explanation on discrepancy between contemporary media reports and Prosecution story of three shots.

• The Dawn, published from Karachi, the Times of India, published from New Delhi and Lok Satta, published from Mumbai reported four shots were fired.
• The Hindu, published from Madras (Chennai) carried a photo (PIB 2626) of the Mahatma showing four wounds. Subsequent Forensic examination of the photo by an American expert, has conformed presence of four wounds.
• Vincent Sheen, an American reporter, whose account is available in Gandhi Smriti (place where Gandhi was killed), standing 10 ft away from Gandhi at the time of murder, reported four dull dark explosions.
• Manuben Gandhi, who walked with Gandhiji when he was shot, recorded in her diary on the night of January 30, 1948 that a bullet was recovered, while giving the Mahatma last bath which corroborated four shot theory.

The Supreme Court itself did not accept request for forensic examination of the blood stained shawl of Gandhiji to establish the number of wounds suffered by Gandhiji. It offered no reason for rejecting this perfectly reasonable request.

The Amicus Curiae refused to accept the existence of Force 136 despite production of documents from Public Record Office, United Kingdom.

The allegation made to the Indian Ambassador to USSR by Ambassadors of East European Countries about the role of British in murder of  Gandhiji; elicited no response.

Court remained silent on the issue

There was no post mortem for reasons that have not been explained. In absence of a post mortem, no forensic examination could be done of the bullet that had remained lodged in the body of the Mahatma. It was never therefore proved beyond doubt that Godse succeeded in killing Gandhi.

The Amicus Curiae confirmed absence of post mortem but refused to comment further.

The Court agreed that absence of a Post Mortem report was an excellent defence for the accused but refused to go further into the matter.

The Prosecution story revolved around Rahgu Mali (Gardner) having caught Godse. However, a BBC report  broadcast even before death of Gandhiji was announced; stated that a young American, later identified as Reiner, a US Intelligence Officer of US Embassy; caught Godse.

https://www.facebook.com/BBCArchive/videos/bbc-reporter-witnesses-gandhi-assassination/519716268401408/

Further, the debriefed account of Reiner continues to be classified by the US authorities, 72 years after the murder.

Neither the Amicus Curiae nor the Court commented on this aspect.

A Prosecution witness Jagdish Prasad Goyal confessed that he had supplied the murder weapon to Godse and that the weapon while in his possession was unlicensed. Why Goyal himself was not prosecuted has never been explained.

It is known that the murder weapon was an Italian Beretta pistol that had been issued to an Italian officer, who surrendered to the British forces. How this weapon in custody of British Army reached the hands of Godse via Goyal has never been explained.

Charge sheet was filed against 12 persons. Trial was held against nine people. Three accused remained absconding till the end. How were the three absconders treated in law, remains unknown.

Neither the Amicus Curiae nor the Court commented on this aspect.

As per records of Kapoor Commission, a foreigner Sadhu (holy man) announced murder of Gandhiji hours before it actually took place.  Amicus Curiae claimed that he could not access the records of Kapoor Commission. The Court did not ask for an explanation from the State about this non cooperation with an Officer of the Court.

Unlike Godse, Apte never confessed to murder. He kept on insisting that he was innocent. His Appeal to Privy Council, was returned in October 1949, as Supreme Court of India was to come in existence on January 26, 1950. He was hanged on November 15, 1949 days before Constitution of India came in force on November 26, 1949. What was the indecent hurry to hang him? Was it to avoid scrutiny by the Supreme Court of India, that owed no allegiance to the British Crown unlike the High Court of East Punjab, which did?

Neither the Amicus Curiae nor the Court commented on this aspect.

Apte had two children – a minor son and a one year old daughter. Both died before adulthood. Should the State not be held accountable for their untimely death?

Neither the Amicus Curiae nor the Court commented on this aspect.

It is an article of faith that India became independent on August 15, 1947 and that Gandhiji is the Father of Independent India.

If that be so, People of India deserve to know why the murderer of the Father of the Nation, was tried, convicted and hanged, in the name of “REX” – the King of England without allowing Supreme Court of India to adjudicate the matter.