Jul
2
Testimony over Godhra Fire; Perpetrators of Pogroms Released on Bail
July 2, 2004 | Comments Off on Testimony over Godhra Fire; Perpetrators of Pogroms Released on Bail
Recent testimony before the Nanavati and Shah commission, investigating the Godhra carnage of February 2002 in Gujarat and the ensuing pogroms against Muslims, challenges the claim of the Godhra fire resulting from a conspiracy hatched to target kar sevaks. K.C. Bawa, former Deputy Superintendent of Police, Western Railways, Ahmedabad division, told the commission that his investigation produced no evidence of a foreign link (a.k.a Pakistan). He also denied that there had been a pre-planned conspiracy to harm the kar sevaks, as alleged by the Gujarat government, and discussed the possible destruction of evidence:
Mr Bawa’s was the first major cross-examination of officials before the commission, taken up at the request of the advocate for the Jan Sangharsha Manch, Mukul Sinha. While Mr. Bawa’s cross-examination was inconclusive and would be resumed tomorrow, Mr. Sinha, when asked, said the initial replies of Mr. Bawa create doubts about the Government’s conspiracy theory. He pointed out that if even the railway police was unaware about the return of the “kar sevaks,” how could the local Muslims who were alleged to have “conspired” to set fire to the coach, have their travel details.
Mr. Bawa said he had reached Godhra a day after the incident on February 27 and had found the ill-fated S6 coach of the Sabarmati Express already in the railway yard. Till he arrived, no “panchanama,” (police statement before witnesses) was signed. He said the coach was open and many people, including the Chief Minister and a large number of other VIPs and others had entered the coach, which could have caused destruction of valuable evidences. There was no explanation why the “panchanama” which under the rules should be filed within 24 hours, was delayed.
In other news relating to the ensuing massacres of Muslims in Gujarat, the Gujarat High Court granted bail to seven people accused of burning alive 11 people:
The court dismissed complainant Mohammad Iqbal Khan Ahmad Khan Bloch’s contentions against the grant of bail, saying, ‘‘It appears that the complainant wants pound of flesh of the accused and nothing less than that.’’ Bloch had lost a relative in the incident. This is one of the riot cases where the Supreme Court has stayed trial. Chargesheet in the case has been filed and recording of evidence has also been completed….
Additional Public Prosecutor Pitamber Abhichandani opposed the bail application, saying that there was a prima facie case against the accused and they had been arrested by the police from the place of the incident.
Besides, the complainant had named them specifically in his FIR and seeing the gravity of the offence, they should not be released on bail.
Bloch had opposed the original bail application also. His counsel Jitendra Malkan had then told the court that one of the witness in the case had told the police that he apprehended danger to his life if the accused were released on bail. But the court had held that apprehension of the witness was without any foundation.
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.