{"id":396,"date":"2004-10-13T15:52:01","date_gmt":"2004-10-13T19:52:01","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.law.harvard.edu\/jaskaran\/2004\/10\/13\/updates-to-gujarat-cases\/"},"modified":"2004-10-13T15:52:01","modified_gmt":"2004-10-13T19:52:01","slug":"updates-to-gujarat-cases","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/jaskaran\/2004\/10\/13\/updates-to-gujarat-cases\/","title":{"rendered":"Updates to Gujarat Cases"},"content":{"rendered":"

<\/a><\/p>\n

There are several updates to the progress of cases arising out of the 2002 Gujarat pogroms of Muslims.  In the case of the murder of seven people in Eral village<\/A><\/FONT>, the Gujarat High Court ordered the reexamination of witnesses who had turned hostile in court:<\/FONT><\/P>
\n


\n

Madina Sheikh, a riot survivor and the original complainant, alleged that her daughter Shabana and niece Shamima were gang-raped and killed while the rioting mob had slaughtered five others before torching all seven bodies in Eral village. <\/EM><\/FONT><\/P>
\n

Sheikh had filed the petition before the High Court challenging the order of a court in Godhra that rejected her appeal requesting the re-examination of seven witnesses who had turned hostile during trial.…<\/EM><\/FONT><\/P>
\n

The seven crucial witnesses, who had turned hostile during the trial at Panchmahals sessions court, include an assistant sub-inspector of police Babubhai Fulabhai, who was a ‘panch’ witness to when weapons were recovered. He retracted his statement later….<\/EM><\/FONT><\/P>
\n

The court had earlier served notices to all the 42 accused, including Chandrasinh Parmar, a VHP worker from Panchmahals, and sought replies. Of the total accused, only three including the prime accused, are in judicial custody. <\/EM><\/FONT><\/P>
\n

All others are out on bail.<\/EM><\/FONT><\/P><\/BLOCKQUOTE>
\n

In the Best Bakery retrial occuring in Mumbai, last week the firefighter<\/FONT> who arrived at the scene of the massacre testified<\/A> in court.  Eight witnesses have deposed since the trial began.<\/FONT><\/P>
\n

Human rights Teesta Setalvad has refused<\/A><\/FONT> to provide the addresses of key eye-witnesses, citing security reasons:<\/FONT><\/P>
\n


\n

The eye-witnesses include Zaheera, her mother Sehrunissa and brothers Nafitullah and Nasibullah. Five other eye-witnesses had migrated to Uttar Pradesh after the incident, but were recently brought to Mumbai…<\/EM><\/FONT><\/P>
\n

Police Commissioner Sudhir Sinha said that Setalvad also refused to bring the eye-witnesses either to her office or the public prosecutor’s office in Mumbai so that they could be served the summons. <\/EM><\/FONT><\/P>
\n

‘‘However, she has given a written undertaking to produce them in court whenever the court requires to examine them or record their statements,’’ said Sinha.<\/EM><\/FONT><\/P><\/BLOCKQUOTE>
\n

After the massacre of 14 Muslims in Seshan village, witnesses say that the perpetrators, out on bail, continue to raom free in their village and threaten<\/A><\/FONT> them to retract their statements or “face the consequences”:<\/FONT><\/P>
\n


\n

One of witnesses, Haji Khan Baloch, has written letters to the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) chairman, Gujarat Chief Secretary, Home Secretary and Superintendent of Police, Banaskantha, seeking help. <\/EM><\/FONT><\/P>
\n

In the letter, Baloch has also requested police authorities to tighten security around the village, following the threats on October 1.<\/EM><\/FONT><\/P><\/BLOCKQUOTE>
\n

In another case, more than two years after it was confirmed that the remains found were human, the police have finally registered an FIR<\/A><\/FONT> for murder of three people and rioting in Dahod district:<\/FONT><\/P>
\n


\n

Despite the FIR, the accused named in it are roaming free. Among the accused identified by Siraj are one forest guard Saburbhai Hemabhai Sangada of Palana village, Limkheda-based bootlegger with political connections Dinesh Nandlal Shah and Babubhai Bodhar Baria of Palli. <\/EM><\/FONT><\/P>
\n

According to the FIR, then Devgadh Baria police station Inspector R.S. Sharma, who had recorded Siraj’s [eyewitness] statement, did not register an FIR or make an attempt for DNA matching of the bones with surviving relatives. Later, Sharma registered a missing persons’ complaint despite Siraj’s protests. Sharma, when asked why he had not registered the FIR in 2002 and had entered it as a missing persons’ case, said: ‘‘I had done so because Siraj had told me that they were missing.’’ When asked why an FIR was not registered even after the bones were confirmed to be human, he said: ‘‘I did not have time as I was too busy with law and order duty.’’<\/EM><\/FONT><\/P><\/BLOCKQUOTE>
\n

In the cross-examination<\/A><\/FONT> of a police inspector in the Gulbargh Society massacre case, revolving around the murder of 39 people, the inspector finally admitted that the police theory that MP and victim Ahsan Jafri fired on the mob, provoking it to attack, is not true.  <\/FONT><\/P><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

There are several updates to the progress of cases arising out of the 2002 Gujarat pogroms of Muslims.  In the case of the murder of seven people in Eral village, the Gujarat High Court ordered the reexamination of witnesses who had turned hostile in court: Madina Sheikh, a riot survivor and the original complainant, alleged […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1193,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-396","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/jaskaran\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/396","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/jaskaran\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/jaskaran\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/jaskaran\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1193"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/jaskaran\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=396"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/jaskaran\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/396\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/jaskaran\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=396"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/jaskaran\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=396"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/jaskaran\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=396"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}