The Sardarpura massacre verdict sends a strong message that you cannot break the will of the Muslim minority to live in India and die in India, concludes DR. S. AUSAF SAIED VASFI.
Although the leadership of the 190-million strong Muslim minority of the over-a-billion strong plural Bharat does not agree with it on several counts, the Sep 9 verdict of the fast track Special Court, adjudicating a 2002 post-Godhra riot case is significant as it convicted 31 people for the torching alive of 33 Muslims in Sardarpura in North Gujarat and sentenced them to life imprisonment.
Besides merits, and of course demerits, the importance of the 1,024-page judgement lies in the fact that it has been delivered in Gujarat, where a key witness in the Naroda Patiya massacre, Mr. Nadeem Ahmed Syed has recently been brutally murdered in Ahmedabad. He was stabbed 28 times and had also got police protection by the apex court. Also note that unlike the late Nadeem, the eye witnesses have an innate weakness in our country to turn hostile during the cross-examination in cases related to communal violence.
It has to be added that apart from the sentence, out of the 31 convicts, 26 have been ordered to pay Rs. 21,700 each, and the remaining five will pay Rs. 23,700 each. They will also have to shell out Rs. 50,000 each as compensation for the victims which will be distributed equally among the unfortunate survivors.
The accused have been asked to submit a solvency bond of Rs. 25,000 each and not to leave the country without the court’s permission.
CONSPIRACY THEORY
Of the 73 accused, 42 were acquitted by the learned judge, Ms S.C. Srivastava, who however, did not agree with the prosecution that violence was the result of a pre-planned conspiracy. Had she agreed with the conspiracy theory, that would have attracted capital punishment, so feel the observers. The prosecution had stated that the accused had gathered in a temple in the village, where a Saffron outfit had distributed tridents or trishuls to the mob. Among the torched alive were five men, 17 women, eight boys and three girls, who had hidden themselves in a pucca house and had found no avenue of escape.
What has to be remembered is that the case was prosecuted by a Special Investigation Team headed by a former Director of the CBI. The Supreme Court, which had received substantive complaints that the Gujarat police was shielding the rioters, had asked the SIT to probe the incidents of mass violence and get the High Court to set up special courts to try the cases.
The 31 convicted had been charged with murder, attempt to murder and rioting. For the proper appreciation of the tragedy one has to remember that among the 31 convicts are 30 from the rich and influential Patel community and one from Prajapati, one of other communities. They included the then Sarpanch of Sardarpura village, Kachrabhai Tribhovandas Patel and a former Sarpanch Kanubhai Joitaram Patel.
REMARKABLE POINTS
The judgement is remarkable despite its too obvious infirmities of technical nature. If the SIT goes for appeal, we are pretty sure, the higher court would not gloss over them.
It is the first verdict in which a special court has convicted 31, mostly from higher caste power-drunk haves. It is a pity indeed that the affluent section of the Gujaratis burnt down their own poor employees – all Muslims.
It is a path-breaking verdict which is likely to influence the future verdicts on communal clashes. A brave lady judge has given a severe jolt to her predecessors-in-profession and contemporaries.
It is an epoch-making verdict which would deter the sharks in future from taking law in their own dirty hands. It would compel the Modis and their admirers to think 10 times before allowing the Sardarpuras.
Several national, English language dailies editorialised the judgement in their Sep 11 editions. The Indian Express said: The story of the victims of Gujarat 2002 is a tale of betrayal at every level. It is this narrative that the legal process has to end. For his part, Gujarat’s chief minister Narendra Modi has never expressed remorse for the riots. And too often, the horrors are reduced to rhetoric – inflated unnecessarily by some and defiantly ignored by others.
The Asian Age held out the view: Its (court’s) emphatic ruling sentencing 31 to life imprisonment in one go is not just a record to itself, but is also a heartening victory for those whose lives were torn asunder. The victims of the massacre in the tiny village of Sardarpura, in Gujarat’s Mehsana district, were not just from one community and were for the most part neither rich nor powerful. They did not have the wherewithal nor the knowledge to continue pursuing the case. But the commitment shown by activists, lawyers, and above all by the courts has ensured that justice has finally been done.
The Hindu gingered up its audience: The Supreme Court directive to the SIT to provide temper-proof cover to witnesses ensured that they were able to testify without fear of reprisals. Its instructions to the trial courts to deal “sternly” with any disturbance that might be created to “terrorise witnesses” strengthens the cause of justice. It is now the turn of the Central Government, which for some inexplicable reason put on hold the comprehensive architecture laid out by the 17th Law Commission in its report on “witness identity protection” – to act.
MUSLIM VIEW
Our opinion is this verdict strengthens the minority’s faith in the judiciary as a whole and rule of law and above all, sanity. It sends a message to the Saffron: You can enact – with the help of police and paramilitary forces – a few or even a plethora of the Moradabads, Hashimpuras, Malianas and Nellies (Assam), Bhagalpurs and Gujarats. But you cannot break the will of the Muslim minority to live in India and die in India. Similarly, you cannot turn the clock back. Bharat is, and shall remain plural, secular and democratic. It is not, and would never be a Hindu state or a Hindutva one.