Opinion - Editorials   

A tortuous quest for justice

Justice, at last. After four years of tortuous twists and turns, what is most striking about the Best Bakery case is not the conviction of nine of the 17 accused brought to trial, but the effort that went into securing the ends of justice. Without the active intervention of social activists, media personnel, the National Human Rights Commission and the Supreme Court, those responsible for burning to death 14 persons in a Vadodara bakery during the post-Godhra anti-Muslim pogrom in Gujarat in 2002 would have walked free from the law. The case tested the ability of the Indian justice delivery system to hold out when the arraignment is of the politically influential capable of manipulating the levers of power. The prime witness, Zahira Sheikh, who had named those responsible immediately after the burning down of the bakery, turned hostile during trial, resulting in the fast track court in Vadodara acquitting all the 21 accused in June 2003. From the very beginning, it was evident that a combination of intimidation and inducement was at work. Ms. Sheikh was accompanied to the fast track court by sympathisers of the accused who claimed they had taken her into "protective" custody. Some of the witnesses actually made a dramatic U-turn at the trial stage describing as "saviours" those very persons they had earlier charged with committing the crime, thus raising apprehension about subversion of the judicial process. After all, the survivors of the fire had voluntarily named the accused before the national media, the Government-appointed Commission of Inquiry, the Concerned Citizens Tribunal and the NHRC before the retraction. At one point, Ms. Sheikh, claiming that members of the ruling establishment had intimidated her, demanded retrial outside Gujarat to enable witnesses to depose in an environment free of fear. Although she again went back on her statement, the case was retried in a Mumbai court on the basis of a Supreme Court order.

Besides sentencing the nine to life imprisonment, the Mumbai sessions court judge, Abhay Thipsay, directed issue of notices to all witnesses who had turned hostile, including Ms. Sheikh, asking them to show cause why they should not be prosecuted for perjury. Significantly, the judge found that Ms. Sheikh and her immediate family members had deliberately given false evidence against social activist Teesta Setalvad, who had been in the forefront of the campaign for justice in the case. One of the reasons why witnesses alter their testimony is that there is no fear of being tried for perjury even if they were found to be lying. In the interests of justice and to ensure a fair trial of other cases it is important to make Ms. Sheikh and the other hostile witnesses explain their flip-flops. Otherwise, the influential will get away with murder, especially if they have the backing of the state as happened with the Best Bakery case at the trial stage.

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

Stories in this Section

A tortuous quest for justice
Protection to seafarers
From "China fear" to "China fever"
Toxic cockpit fumes that bring danger to the skies
History against art
Railway budget
A watershed
Praiseworthy
Destruction foretold
On Bihar
"U.S. administration sees itself as being outside the rule of law"

Copyright © 2006, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu