All you need to know about Godhra train burning case

Agencies
October 9, 2017

New Delhi, Oct 9: The Gujarat high court is likely to pronounce its verdict on a set of appeals challenging convictions and acquittals by a Special Investigation Team court in the 2002 Godhra train burning case on Monday, more than two years after the completion of hearings on the matter.

The judgement will be delivered by a bench of justice Anant Dave and justice GR Udhwani at about 11am.

Here’s all you need to know about the case:

Train set on fire

A coach of the Sabarmati Express was set on fire at Godhra on February 27, 2002. The blaze in S6 coach killed 59 Hindus, mostly karsevaks or volunteers returning from Ayodhya, where rival Hindu and Muslim groups are locked in a decades-old dispute over a religious site.

The train fire sparked three days of reprisal attacks across the state that left 790 Muslims and 254 Hindus dead, official sources say. And as many as 100,000 Muslims and 40,000 Hindus were rendered homeless in the riots. About 130 are still reported missing.

Probe into the carnage

The Nanavati Commission, appointed by the Gujarat government to probe the incident, concluded that the fire in the coach was not an accident but it was set on fire. The Sangh Parivar claimed the train fire was targeted at the Hindus, who were returning to Ayodhya after a pilgrimage.

A damning report of Mohinder Singh Dahiya, the then assistant director of Gandhinagar’s Forensic Studies Laboratory (FSL), concluded that the coach was set afire by someone “standing in the passage of the compartment near seat number 72, using a container with a wide opening about 60 litres of inflammable liquid has been poured and then a fire has been started in the bogie”.

The accused

The special SIT court on March 1, 2011, convicted 31 people and acquitted 63 in the case. While 11 people were sentenced to death, 20 were handed out life imprisonment.

The court convicted 31 people while accepting the prosecution’s contention that there was a conspiracy behind the incident.

All the 31 were convicted under various sections of the Indian Penal Code related to murder, attempt to murder and criminal conspiracy. Those acquitted included prime accused Maulana Umarji, the then president of Godhra municipality Mohammad Hussain Kalota, Mohammad Ansari and Nanumiya Chaudhary of Gangapur, Uttar Pradesh.

Later, several appeals were filed in the high court challenging the convictions, while the Gujarat government questioned the acquittal of the 63 people.

The 2002 Gujarat riots

There were SIT probes into the involvement of several political leaders, including Prime Minister Narendra Modi - who was then the Gujarat chief minister - for criminal conspiracy in the riots. Modi and others were cleared after the SIT filed a closure report on February 8, 2012.

Maya Kodnani, the women and child welfare minister in the then Modi government in Gujarat, was sentenced to life in prison for a separate case of rioting in Ahmedabad’s Naroda Patiya area, a verdict she has challenged. She has been on bail since 2014.

Comments

Althaf
 - 
Monday, 9 Oct 2017

When court is controlling by sangh parivar then what verdict we can expect ?? All verdict will be in favor of sangh parivar.

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
June 10,2020

Chennai, Jun 10: DMK MLA J Anbazhagan who had tested positive for coronavirus and was on ventilator support from June 3 passed away at a hospital in Chennai on Wednesday.

Coincidently, today is the 62nd birthday of the MLA.

"Anbazhagan J, who has been fighting for his life with severe COVID 19 pneumonia rapidly deteriorated early this morning. In spite of full medical support including mechanical ventilation at our COVID facility, he succumbed to his illness. He was declared dead at 08:05 hours on the 10th of June 2020," the hospital said in a statement.

In 2001, Anbazhagan was elected from T Nagar Assembly constituency. He served for five years.

Later in 2011, he was elected to Tamil Nadu Assembly from Chepauk-Thiruvallikeni seat. The DMK leader was re-elected from the same constituency in 2016.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
March 12,2020

New Delhi, Mar 12: The Supreme Court told the Uttar Pradesh government on Thursday that as of now, there was no law that could back their action of putting up roadside posters of those accused of vandalism during anti-CAA protests in Lucknow.

An apex court bench refused to stay the March 9 Allahabad High Court order directing the Yogi Adityanath administration to remove the posters.

The top court, which grilled the Uttar Pradesh government for putting up such posters in public, described the plea as a matter that needed "further elaboration and consideration".

A vacation bench of justices U U Lalit and Aniruddha Bose said a "bench of sufficient strength" would consider next week the Uttar Pradesh government's appeal against the Allahabad High Court order directing the state administration to remove the posters of those accused of vandalism during anti-CAA protests.

It directed the apex court registry to put up the case file before Chief Justice of India (CJI) S A Bobde so that a "bench of sufficient strength can be constituted at the earliest to hear and consider" the case next week.

During the hearing, the bench told Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Uttar Pradesh government, that it was a matter of "great importance".

It asked Mehta whether the state government had the power to put up such posters.

The top court, however, said there was no doubt that action should be taken against rioters and they should be punished.

Mehta told the court that the posters were put up as a "deterrent" and the hoardings only said that these persons were liable to pay for their alleged acts during the violence.

Senior advocate A M Singhvi, appearing for former IPS officer S R Darapuri whose poster has also been affixed in Lucknow, told the bench that the state was duty-bound to show the authority of law backing its action.

He said the action of the Uttar Pradesh government amounted to a "mega blanket" approach of naming and shaming these persons without final adjudication and it was an open invitation to common men to lynch them as the posters also had their addresses and photographs.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
January 23,2020

Patna, Jan 23: "They should go wherever they want," Bihar Chief Minister and JDU supremo Nitish Kumar said on Thursday when asked of Prashant Kishor and Pavan Verma's repeated questions about the party's stand's on the newly enacted Citizenship Act.

"It is their personal decision. They should go wherever they want. We don't have an objection. Don't look at JDU in the context of statements by some people. JDU works with determination. We have a clear stand and don't have any confusion," the Chief Minister told reporters here.

"If they have something to tell, they should come and discuss it within the party. They should go wherever they want. They have my good wishes," he said.

JDU spokesperson and national general secretary Pavan Verma has questioned his party's alliance with the BJP in Delhi Assembly polls while Kishor has more than once made his differences with the party known on the issue of the amended Citizenship Act, and National Register of Citizens.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.