People's Democracy
(Weekly Organ of the Communist Party of India (Marxist)
No. 37
September 16, 2012
|
Vol. XXXVI
No. 37 September 16, 2012 |
NARODA
PATIYA MASSACRE Premeditated
Conspiracy and Attempted Cover-up Archana
Prasad ON
August 30, 2012, Judge Jyotsna Yagnik delivered her
landmark verdict in the
Naroda Patiya Case at the final hearing of one of the
most important cases in
the strings of complaints filed after the Gujarat
Genocide of 2002. The common
judgement pronounced for all eight charge sheets filed
in the case have
highlighted to important facets being hitherto
disputed by BJP state government
and their partner, the Hindutva organisations. First,
the judgement univocally
proves that the massacre at Naroda Patiya, ‘the most
heinous crime’ in the
post-Godhra riots (p 13), is an organised and
premeditated conspiracy of the Hindutva
brigade. Second, it points to serious lapses in
previous investigations and
their deliberate attempt to shield the accused.
Through a detailed analysis of
these investigations, and a recording of the oral
evidence of 327 witnesses,
the judge emphatically privileges the testimonies of
the victims, thus giving
them a sense of partial justice. It holds 32 of the 61
accused guilty and
included a former minister and BJP MLA of Naroda
Patiya, Mayaben Kodnani
(accused 37), Babu Bajarangi (accused 18), Suresh
Langda (accused 22), elected
BJP councillor Kishan Korani (accused 20), amongst
others, guilty of criminal
conspiracy including homicides and crimes against
Muslim women and sentenced
them to long periods of imprisonment. In this sense
the judgement vindicates
the decade long campaign and struggle of the victims
who are being supported by
secular civil society organisations and democratic
forces in this effort. PLANNED SANGH PARIVAR CONSPIRACY A
detailed analysis of the 1969 page mammoth judgement
exposes the fallacy of the
Sangh Parivar’s claim that the The
conspiracy can clearly be inferred to have been
hatched at anytime after visit
of A-18 [Babu Bajarangi] at Godhra and anytime before
arriving at Nurani on
28/02/2002…. common intentions were perceived,
agreement to do illegal act of
communal riot, to commit offences against human body,
property was realised by
any means of communication as had it not been so it is
impossible that when the
bandh was for entire day, all the accused
would meet at the same time,
same place, with same preparation and perceive and
share common intentions….
The intentions are inferred to be as below, as emerges
from facts and
circumstances on record: [a]
To ventilate the anger of Godhra Carnage. [b]
To take revenge with Muslim community. [c]
To destroy, ruin and to damage properties of Muslims. [d]
To do away Muslims to raise the death toll so many
times more than Godhra carnage. [e]
To terrorise Muslims etc. The
co-conspirators of A-37 [Dr Mayaben Kodnani] were out
to
execute the conspiracy and to carry out the task, viz
the commission of the
offences for fulfilment of the object. With the common
intentions and
agreement, the assault was initiated by the unlawful
assembly. Secondly, she
was the current MLA of Naroda constituency and the
site of the offences were
part of Naroda constituency. Thirdly, political
inclination would always be to
take political mileage of such situation. A-37 [Dr
Mayaben Kodnani] cannot be
exception to it [Naroda
Patiya Case
Common Judgement, pp
741-742]. The
judge reaches this conclusion after hearing 173
prosecution witnesses and their
cross examination after which she reconstructs the
chain of events, making
pertinent observations.
Quoting the
testimony of Zubair Khan Islam Khan Pathan (PW 227)
she writes: There were
mobs near Natraj Hotel and Krishna Nagar. The
mobs were of Hindus. The men of the mob sitting in
rickshaw were shouting that
'Bandiyas (loose word used for Muslims), you stop'….
At this time, I saw Bipin
Panchal (A-44) in mob of Krishna Nagar, who was
possessing sword in his hand,
there was Guddu Chhara (deceased) with iron pipe and
Babu Garagewala (A-33)
with iron pipe in their hands…. I saw Mayaben (A-37)
on the road in the mob of
Natraj Hotel. The men of that mob had saffron flags,
and were dressed up in
Khakhi Chaddi (Shorts)….The men of the mob were told
by Mayaben (A-37) that
'you go ahead I am with you'…. Since Mayaben (A-37)
told the mob the sentence
reproduced…. The police sitting at Police Point at
Nurani Masjid has told us
that 'nothing will happen, you take Muslims at their
home' hearing this from
police I took away Muslims from Nurani to home. While
I was escorting the
Muslims at their home at this time I saw persons of
Hindu community to have
been stone-pelting on Nurani and they were throwing
burning rags on Nurani,
police burst teargas on Muslims. Police did not help
Muslims. The men of the
mob were telling, 'Bandiyas, now your are not going to
be survived, you speak
Jay Shri Ram'. At this time, there was stampede to
save our lives. The men of
the mob were shouting, 'Kill, Cut' [Naroda
Patiya Case Common Judgement, pp
673-674]. REMARKABLE JUDGEMENT This
judgement is remarkable, not only for the ways in
which it is sensitive towards
the sentiments and experience of individual witnesses
but also for way in which
it unravels the collective memory of the riot victims,
thereby pointing towards
the organised nature of the conspiracy. Thus the judge
writes: “Numerous occurrence
PWs [prosecution witnesses], PWs who
involve dead accused in the crime and in fact, out
of the total 173 PWs about
150 PWs of them very clearly and firmly bring on
record the fact about the
presence and participation of the accused with
deadly weapons on the day” [p 273].
For the judge the existence
of such a common memory has been
crucial to prove that the conspiracy especially in the
wake of the failure of
investigation agencies to keep a proper record. For
the judge, the existence of
such a collective memory is only possible “if there is
meeting of mind,
agreement, pre-meditation, pre-consort and preparation
among the accused. When
so many accused behave in a similar way, at similar
site and time, it itself
speaks about conspiracy at a large level. The accused
had sufficient time to
make all the preparations” [p 273]. While the
judgement is quick to praise the
courage of the witnesses, it would also be appropriate
to highlight the role of
several secular and democratic organisations in
keeping alive the memory of the
DISPLAYING THE ‘POWER’ OF HINDUTVA In
another aspect of the conspiracy, the entire judgement
provides evidence of
another well known fact, i.e., the involvement of the
entire machinery of Hindutva
organisations including some leaders of the BJP.
Supporting this claim, the judge
cites a complaint made by the police sub-inspector, Mr
Solanki to the first
investigating officer, Mr Mysorewala. She states: If this complaint is perused, it
is stated therein that mobs
of people from Krishna Nagar, In the humble opinion of
this court, in any area, normally none
can be more active leader than the MP or MLA. It is
not only undisputed but
even admitted fact that A-37 [Mayaben Kodnani] is the
MLA of BJP --- the ruling
party then, from Naroda constituency, hence it is
clear that she hails from and
she is on the date of the occurrence in BJP. Now, if
she cannot be termed to be
active leader of BJP that too in Naroda constituency,
then who else can be
called the leader of BJP in that area. It can
therefore, be inferred that A-37
[Mayaben Kodnani] was present at the site. The police
officer has very
specifically stated that the active leaders were
instigating the mobs [Naroda Patiya
Case Common Judgement, p 726]. Thus
the judgement not only nails the Hindutva mass
organisations but also the BJP
which has been currently trying to distance itself
from the Gujarat carnage
with the impending Manoj (A-41), Mayaben
(A-37), Kishan Korani (A-20), Bhavani
(dead), Babu Bajrangi (A-18) were the main leaders who
were present there.
Kishan (A-20) and Manoj (A-41), are closed aide of
Mayaben (A-37). They are
left and right hands of Mayaben…. Truckloads of
weapons, pouches of water and
snacks were brought in. Gas cylinders were used in the
occurrence. We were
helped (talks with reference to fiscal help) by Babu
Bajrangi (A-18) only.
Pipes, batons were taken from our home. I had
participated in riots. I had no
repentance for whatever I had done…. Mayaben was there
at the site on the date
of occurrence for the whole day up to 8 p m, in her
car taking round and on
every round, she was telling us "You are doing proper
deed, go ahead"
[Naroda Patiya
Case
Common Judgement, p 770]. These
tapes also show the sick mentality and the political
intention of the Hindutva
brigade. Thus Babu Bajrangi says that the Chhara
tribe, to which many of the
accused belong, were instrumental in spreading fear
amongst the Muslims. As he
says in his interview with Ashish Khetan (prosecution
witness 322) and the
Tehelka reporter who interviewed Babu Bajrangi: The abdomen of the pregnant
woman was slit with the sword, a large
number of people were done away at Naroda Patiya by
him. They were charged by
fanaticism…. They have slaughtered the Muslims, they
killed them. Ravan’s Lanka
was destroyed. Hinduism is within them…. The moment I
was noticed by the
police, they immediately realised that now it would
all be over (Meaning
thereby police was afraid of him). Had I not been in
Naroda, nobody would have
dared to come out…. 23 revolvers were collected at
night (talks for intervening
night of 27/02/2002 and 28/02/2002). I shall not stop
working for Hinduism
until I die. I have personal notions about Hinduism….
The moment I saw corpses
lying in Godhra, that very night I had decided and
challenged that, ‘There
would be four times more slaughter in PATIYA than that
of GODHRA…. I have two
enemies, the Muslims and the Christians. I had been to
Godhra. I have pretty
good rapport with the police agency…. My name is
enough to bewilder the Muslims
[Naroda Patiya
Case
Common Judgement, pp 763-65] While the interviews,
recorded in 2008 were telecast to the
public, their significance has increased with of their
reproduction within the judgement
and their use as extra-judicial evidence. The judge
explains her decision to
include these as evidence at length and underlines
their importance to overcome
the problems of misrepresentation and omission in
official records of
successive investigations. This itself points towards
an attempted cover-up
which this judgement has unveiled. The evidence
produced and recorded in the
special court also underlines the relationship between
the political intention
and the fear psychosis that the Hindutva brigade
sought to create. This fear
psychosis was evident in the state assembly elections
immediately after the
Gujarat riots. The victory of Modi in 2002 only formed
the basis of a wider
communal polarisation and targeting of the riot
victims even as all the six
investigating officers took care to avoid a focus on
the real political
culprits. In this context the Gujarat model of
development and the Sadbhavana Yatra
was sought to be the
hegemonic instrument that would hide the scars of
2002. It remains to be seen
whether the democratic movement can utilise this
judgement to counter both,
Modi’s yatra
for his re-election in
the upcoming Gujarat elections and the forces of
Hindutva hegemony that form
the basis of his current campaign. [Part
II
on evidence on the attempted cover-up next week.]
