Karnavati, Gujarat. A day after Godhra Train Carnage, the Railway Police was put under immense pressure by pseudo-secular politicians and the media, a sessions court said. Judge Harsh Trivedi said that pseudo-secular media and organisations pressurised the police to arrest these persons.
A sessions court in Halol (Gujarat) acquitted 35 persons in the 2002 post-Godhra riots case, blaming the “pseudo-secular” media, politicians, as well as witnesses from the Muslim community, for the prolonged trial faced by “prominent Hindus” in the case.
There was a spontaneous set of riots in Gujarat, and these were not planned as described by pseudo-secular persons, the Court said.
“Peace loving Gujarati people were shocked and anguished by this incident. We have seen that then pseudo-secular media and politicians rubbed salt into wound of the anguished people. Report says that 16 of Gujarat’s 24 Districts were engulfed in communal rioting – post Godhra riots (sic)”, the judge observed in his order.
The police unnecessarily implicated the accused in the case, the judge went on to find.
“Police implicated prominent Hindu persons of the area Doctor, Professor, Teacher, Businessmen, Panchayat official etc. hails to of a Hindu community. Due to uproar of pseudo-secular media and organization, the accused persons have unnecessarily to face a prolonged trial (sic),” the Court emphasised.
Communal violence in India is not a new phenomenon, the judge observed in his order.
“Communal riots in India have persisted for long times and are usually caused by the trifle dispute and intolerance, manipulation of religious artifacts, intrusion by others on festivals, conflicting prayer time, dispute over places of worship, intermarriage, desecration of holy places, sexual offences rumours on issue of encroachments or the presence of anti-India agents (sic),” the order stated.
The judge concluded that the prosecutor had been working under the pressure of certain community-led NGOs and, therefore, unnecessarily prolonged the case by calling many witnesses. Almost all these witnesses turned out to be wholly unreliable, the court found.
“In our country the standard of truth amongst the population is very low. In this case testimonies of almost all witness revealed to be wholly unreliable. Several persons of Muslim community who were said to be victims of communal violence in Delol, Derol, Kalol etc. had made oral and written representations of their grievance, before different higher authority. Upon perusing those allegations keeping them next to next. I found that every time they introduced new story (sic),” the judge noted.
The prosecution witness, particularly, Muslim witnesses who allegedly suffered during the riots, gave widely divergent versions of the riots, the judge said.
In cases of communal riots, a large number of persons are generally involved and the evidence is often entirely of a partisan character, the judge further highlighted.
“There is moreover, great danger of innocent persons being implicated along with the guilty, owing to the tendency of the parties in such cases to try to implicate falsely as many of their enemies as they can. Therefore, the possibility of innocent persons being falsely implicated, should always be borne in mind by the Judge (sic),” the Court said.
The judge also observed that the investigation of the case was prolonged due to continued and repeated, written allegations made by persons from the Muslim community.
The court proceeded to find that the prosecution had failed to prove the recovery and seizure of weapons from the accused persons through independent witnesses.
“There is no direct evidence which can link any five accused, out of these accused persons with the alleged offence. In case on hand members of both communities suffered damages to properties and the police personnel sustained injuries by stone pelting from Muslim mob. In spite of that the prosecution is not able to call section 149 (dealing with punishment for being part of an “unlawful assembly”) in aid, because there is no certainty that there was at least five persons in the mob, sharing the common object,” the Court said.
With these observations the Court acquitted the 35 persons.
Courtesy – Bar&Bench