The Hindu : National : Medical expert grilled by defence in Best Bakery case

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Thursday, Oct 21, 2004

National

National

Medical expert grilled by defence in Best Bakery case

By Our Special Correspondent

MUMBAI, OCT. 20. N.V. Champaneria, assistant director, Forensic Science Laboratory, Baroda, today told the sessions court during the Best Bakery retrial that there was no residue of petroleum or hydrocarbon product found on the samples taken from the site of the incident.

Fourteen people were killed when the Best Bakery in Baroda was set on fire by a mob in the aftermath of the Godhra incident. Mr. Champaneria told the court that the exhibits failed to show petroleum samples after chemical tests. The absence of a petroleum product could be due to many reasons, including improper collection of samples or spraying of water. He said the samples might not have been collected from the correct place. To questions from the defence, he said the tests were negative.

Bone examination

The defence also grilled Shabbirali Syed, professor and head of department of anatomy, who had examined the bones collected as evidence from the site of the Best Bakery. Yesterday, Dr. Syed, who is now posted at PDU Medical College, Rajkot, submitted his certificate after he was asked to examine samples of charred bones collected from the site of the Best Bakery carnage. The defence had noticed a discrepancy between what Dr. Syed submitted and the documents made available to the court along with the charge-sheet.

But today Dr. Syed explained the full procedure involved in the matter, saying that notes were made initially and kept along with the evidence. A photocopy of these notes was also made in case the original was lost. The final certificate was prepared based on the original note and the facts were consistent with that. But, he said, there was no need to make the changes in the form of corrections or additions in the original note. To a question from the defence, he agreed that the changes were not signed by anyone nor were the dates written when the changes were made.

Defence counsel, Adik Shirodkar, put it to Dr. Syed that the investigating officer, Mr. Kanani, did not approve of his original examination report and he wanted the changes made. Mr. Shirodkar also said that Dr. Syed had tampered with the certificate, which Dr. Syed denied. The issue of contention is that in the notes, Dr. Syed had written that some of the bones belonged to a person over 24 and in the final certificate this was changed to over 18 years of age.

Yesterday, Dr. Syed had identified the samples of bones collected from the site and said that they belonged to two persons, one of them aged over 18, based on a piece of the upper jaw, which was part of the evidence.

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

National