|
On
12th April this year, the Supreme Court of India
created history. Its judgment in the Best Bakery case was not
merely a legal landmark. Coming as it did, in the face of
intimidation and manipulation of judicial processes, it provided a
vital ingredient in the search of victims of riots and communal
violence for justice: hope.
The apex court’s judgment on the Best Bakery case opened three
crucial doors for the victims: it ordered for a transfer of the
case outside Gujarat; it ordered a re-investigation and a re-trial
and lastly, it allowed for the appointment of a public prosecutor
in consultation with the victims.
All eyes are now on the Supreme Court for its decision on other
cases seeking a similar transfer outside Gujarat. The cases are
scheduled to come up before the Supreme Court in August and,
whatever the outcome, for the victims at least, the road to
justice will be well and truly marked out.
What are these cases all about? Principally, the National Human
Rights Commission (NHRC) was concerned with possible miscarriage
of justice in several cases. In a transfer petition before the
Supreme Court (TP (Crl) No. 194-202 of 2003 and 326-329 of 2003),
it sought the transfer of 14 trials that pertain to incidents of
rioting, massacres and killings, including at Godhra. The other
incidents had occurred in Sardarpura, Naroda Patiya, Gulbarga
Society and Odh.
The NHRC had also filed a special leave petition, later converted
into a writ petition (WP (Crl) No. 109 of 2003) seeking guidelines
on protection for witnesses in the wake of the Best Bakery trial
court judgement.
Citizens groups like the Citizens for Justice and Peace (CJP)
which has been supporting prime witness Zahira Sheikh in the Best
Bakery case, has sought to be impleaded in the NHRC’s transfer
petition on behalf of witnesses in various riot-related incidents
of violence.
CJP has filed two other Special Leave Petitions (SLPs) in
connection with the Best Bakery matter and another (SLP (Crl) No
5309 of 2003) against the trial court judgement in respect to
killings in Kidiad. In this case too, all the witnesses turned
hostile and the Gujarat government did not file an appeal in the
higher court. It did so subsequent to the filing of the SLP.
CJP’s transfer petition (TP (Crl) No 66-72 of 2004 was filed
under Sec 25 of POTA in relation to the Godhra incident so as to
bring the case under the purview of POTA, which was not in effect
when the original petition was filed.
Apart from these cases, two other incidents have secured special
attention. These pertain to the case of the gang rape and killings
of members of the family of Bilkees Bano and in another incident
in Prantij, Sabarkantha district, where a British national of
Indian origin, Saeed Safik Dawood and his companions were killed
by a mob.
There are other petitions before the Supreme Court filed by
individuals and organisations and pertain to different legal pleas
on the processes of justice.
For instance, among the first petitions filed on issues of justice
was by danseuse Mallika Sarabhai and others (WP (C) No. 221 of
2002) seeking a CBI investigation into riot-related violence and
the implementation of the recommendations of the NHRC.
Another writ petition filed by well-known writer and human rights
activist Maheshweta Devi and others (WP (C) No. 530 of 2002) is
concerned with the condition of relief camps and the inadequate
compensation being awarded to victims of riot-related violence.
A petition filed by adman Alyque Padamsee and others (WP (Crl) No.
11-15 of 2003) is related to the refusal of the Gujarat government
to grant sanction to prosecute Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra
Modi and VHP chief Ashok Singhal for making provocative
statements.
Other petitions either pertain to old matters or that deal with
other judicial aspects (transfer of Godhra cases to CBI; police
reforms; mis-governance and the commission of inquiry instituted
into the Godhra incident and the riots that followed).
In addition, the Gujarat government had filed an SLP against the
High Court’s dismissal of its appeal in the Best Bakery case.
Now, with all the accused in the Best Bakery matter being back in
custody and the appointment of Additional Sessions Court judge
Abhay Thipsay to conduct the case in Maharashtra, the case will be
conducted afresh.
Human rights activists and lawyers, faced with the onerous task of
helping the courageous witnesses in all these cases to secure
justice and reaffirm their faith in judicial and democratic
processes, require all manner of help. Apart from the sheer
physical support derived from the presence of supporters in court
when the trial is on, other kinds of help envisaged is providing
of safe accommodation for witnesses, financial support for their
travel and other incidental expenses and even educational support
for their children.
It’s a long haul and its only just begun.
|
