Rocking..Godhra incident
A rocking riot…in hearts of people and country
What is the Best Bakery case all about?
On March 1, 2002, a violent mob – of about 500 people, according to the reports of National Human Rights Commission and the police -- killed 14 people at the Best bakery, a small outlet in the Hanuman Tekri area of Vadodara. The key witnesses in the case lied in court out of fear for their lives as they got death threats made this case an important one. The case was the first one to be handled by a special fast-track court in Gujarat.
Why is it so sensational?
The Best Bakery Case has come to symbolise the carnage -- and the alleged complicity of the state government in it -- that followed in Gujarat after the Sabaramati Express was set afire in Godhra riot in 2002 killing more than 50 pilgrims returning from Ayodhya.
In fact, in December 2003, after being rapped on the knuckles by the Supreme Court, the Gujarat state government admitted there were lapses in the investigations into the case and that the police had bungled in recording evidence. Also, the Best Bakery, case, like the Jessica Lal case, was considered an open and shut case because there were eye-witnesses. And like the Lal case, it saw witnesses turning hostile, allowing the accused to walk free.
Zaheera Sheikh, then a 19-year-old, who saw her family members burnt to death, became one of the two faces of the Gujarat riots that killed more than 1,000 people. The other being a tailor from Ahmedabad, Qutubuddin Ansari, whose picture -- weeping, with folded hands, begging for mercy -- became one of the haunting images of the riots.
A nation’s cry… The noted picture of Qutubuddin Ansari’s weeping.
Why the case tried in Maharashtra?
On March 17, 2003, Zaheera stunned everyone by saying in court she did not see anyone of the mob because she was hiding from it. She was not the only one who changed her statement. As many as 37 out of the 73 witnesses turned hostile. On June 27, 2003, all 21 accused were acquitted for lack of evidence. The judgment criticised the police for shoddy investigation. Many newspaper reports said some politicians threatened the witnesses.
On July 11, 2003, Zaheera testified before the National Human Rights Commission that she was forced to change her statement. On August 1 the same year, the NHRC filed a petition in the Supreme Court asking for a retrial in a court outside Gujarat.
September 8, 2003: In a sworn affidavit to the Supreme Court, Zaheera said she turned hostile because she was threatened by Congress leader Chandrakant Batthoo, Srivastava's brother, in the court premises.
Why did eye-witness keep changing her statement all the time?
In January 2005, a sting operation by the publication Tehelka alleged Madu Shrivastava had bribed her Rs 18 lakh (Rs 1.8 million) to change her statement.
What happens to Zaheera now?
The Mumbai court has sent notices to all the witnesses who had turned hostile -- including Zaheera -- asking them to explain why they should not prosecuted for perjury. Obviously, the last word has not been said in the case.
Why this case, violations?
As it was a mass massacre, it was necessary to catch the main culprits, which created a bad image of our country to the outside world. With the money and power in hand they escaped well and threatened the main witness in the case and roaming freely in the society. According to IPC 153 (promoting enemity between different religion groups) and 295 (intentionally outraging religious feelings) the riot hurt the feelings of minority community. The statement changing nature of Zaheera made more difficult to prove the case and there is no law to force her to say.
What is the Best Bakery case all about?
On March 1, 2002, a violent mob – of about 500 people, according to the reports of National Human Rights Commission and the police -- killed 14 people at the Best bakery, a small outlet in the Hanuman Tekri area of Vadodara. The key witnesses in the case lied in court out of fear for their lives as they got death threats made this case an important one. The case was the first one to be handled by a special fast-track court in Gujarat.
Why is it so sensational?
The Best Bakery Case has come to symbolise the carnage -- and the alleged complicity of the state government in it -- that followed in Gujarat after the Sabaramati Express was set afire in Godhra riot in 2002 killing more than 50 pilgrims returning from Ayodhya.
In fact, in December 2003, after being rapped on the knuckles by the Supreme Court, the Gujarat state government admitted there were lapses in the investigations into the case and that the police had bungled in recording evidence. Also, the Best Bakery, case, like the Jessica Lal case, was considered an open and shut case because there were eye-witnesses. And like the Lal case, it saw witnesses turning hostile, allowing the accused to walk free.
Zaheera Sheikh, then a 19-year-old, who saw her family members burnt to death, became one of the two faces of the Gujarat riots that killed more than 1,000 people. The other being a tailor from Ahmedabad, Qutubuddin Ansari, whose picture -- weeping, with folded hands, begging for mercy -- became one of the haunting images of the riots.
A nation’s cry… The noted picture of Qutubuddin Ansari’s weeping.
Why the case tried in Maharashtra?
On March 17, 2003, Zaheera stunned everyone by saying in court she did not see anyone of the mob because she was hiding from it. She was not the only one who changed her statement. As many as 37 out of the 73 witnesses turned hostile. On June 27, 2003, all 21 accused were acquitted for lack of evidence. The judgment criticised the police for shoddy investigation. Many newspaper reports said some politicians threatened the witnesses.
On July 11, 2003, Zaheera testified before the National Human Rights Commission that she was forced to change her statement. On August 1 the same year, the NHRC filed a petition in the Supreme Court asking for a retrial in a court outside Gujarat.
September 8, 2003: In a sworn affidavit to the Supreme Court, Zaheera said she turned hostile because she was threatened by Congress leader Chandrakant Batthoo, Srivastava's brother, in the court premises.
Why did eye-witness keep changing her statement all the time?
In January 2005, a sting operation by the publication Tehelka alleged Madu Shrivastava had bribed her Rs 18 lakh (Rs 1.8 million) to change her statement.
What happens to Zaheera now?
The Mumbai court has sent notices to all the witnesses who had turned hostile -- including Zaheera -- asking them to explain why they should not prosecuted for perjury. Obviously, the last word has not been said in the case.
Why this case, violations?
As it was a mass massacre, it was necessary to catch the main culprits, which created a bad image of our country to the outside world. With the money and power in hand they escaped well and threatened the main witness in the case and roaming freely in the society. According to IPC 153 (promoting enemity between different religion groups) and 295 (intentionally outraging religious feelings) the riot hurt the feelings of minority community. The statement changing nature of Zaheera made more difficult to prove the case and there is no law to force her to say.
No comments:
Post a Comment