Nine months after
charges were framed in the famed Best Bakery case, the penultimate stage of the
re-trial has been reached. As we go to press, a total of 75 prosecution
witnesses have been examined of which only seven have turned hostile. Currently,
the cross-examination of the investigating officer (IO), PP Kannani by the
defence counsel, is on.
Barely one month after
the trial began on October 4, 2004 at the Mazgaon Court in South-Central Mumbai,
serious attempts to derail the due process of law were made when key star
witness in the trial, Zahira Sheikh turned hostile for a second time and hurled
allegations against us (see CC, November 1984). Six months after those
unfortunate developments, where does this trial stand today?
With 75 witnesses and
evidence running into a few thousand pages, a genuine appreciation of evidence
would only be possible after defence witnesses have been called and arguments
have been made by both the prosecution and the defence. Until that stage is
reached, which looks to be a few months away, an appraisal of the proceedings so
far will help bring our readers up to date.
One of the key issues
raised by the Supreme Court in its historic verdict of April 12, 2004 (see
CC, April 2004) was about the conduct of the prosecution during the trial in
the fast track court in Vadodara. Some key witnesses, bakery workers who were
all eye-witnesses, were not examined in the Vadodara court and surprisingly,
relatives of the accused were called in as defence witnesses. Of the 74
witnesses, 34 turned hostile in Vadodara.
Apart from the fact that
four independent eye-witnesses, three bakery workers and Yasmin Sheikh, Zahira
Sheikh’s sister-in-law, identified key accused by face and name, the prosecution
in the re-trial has managed to bring a host of documented material on record as
evidence.
For example, the fact
that the police as the investigating agency in the Best Bakery trial treated
Zahira Sheikh’s statement made before senior officials and the IO on March 2,
2002 as the First Information Report (FIR) in the case. And that there is clear
evidence to show that she had named nine accused in the first instance and five
more later, is also a case in point. The fact that this statement was treated as
the FIR and given a Case Report – CR number has been brought as evidence through
documents in the re-trial. Moreover, this FIR was filed before the magistrate as
required under law, and a Special Report on the Best Bakery case also faxed from
the Control Room at Vadodara on March 3, 2002. There are detailed ledger entries
of this fax having been sent through the appropriate channels on that date.
What this evidence
establishes is that in the mass and compounded crimes committed by the mob
gathered at Best Bakery on the night of March 1, 2002 right until the next
morning, Zahira Sheikh was treated as the chief complainant by the investigating
authorities. While the evidence of Yasmin Sheikh was being recorded, she stated
that the police were recording a video of the events on the morning of March 2.
This was, in fact, an official video recording of the rescue operations being
conducted by the police at Best Bakery. This video, which was brought in as
evidence after the videographer was also examined, gives a graphic view of the
tragedy that unfolded. Zahira Sheikh and her family are shown in a traumatised
condition, including her maternal grandmother who was on the terrace and is
shown in the video being helped down by fire brigade personnel. A distraught
Yasmin is seen with her little daughter beside husband Nafitullah, who has been
brutally attacked. As it played, the video image of a baby whose leg had been
ripped off chilled the courtroom.
A stir was created
during the re-trial when former freelance filmmaker Pankaj Shankar (now with
Doordarshan) offered to give testimony before the re-trial court because he
had interviewed Zahira and her family in April 2002, a month after the tragedy.
Examined as a prosecution witness, Shankar’s testimony could also provide a
valuable insight into events since it depicts Zahira looking straight into the
camera and naming the accused, and her brother Nafitullah stating, "Sab ko
jaanta hoon, sab ko pahachanta hoon (I know and recognise all of them)."
Documentary evidence
brought on record by the prosecution includes detailed medical entries made
regarding the victims and those who survived with doctors, firemen, policemen,
panch witnesses, etc. all being examined.
The prosecution led its
case in the Mumbai re-trial court with the evidence of key eye-witnesses who had
not received summons or who did not appear in Vadodara. Tufel Ahmed Sheikh
stepped into the box as the first prosecution witness and identified seven
accused by face. Tufel, who was injured by a sword on the back of his head, both
sides of his chest, left arm, right leg (with burns) and left leg, identified
the persons who assaulted him on the morning of March 2, 2002 as: Sanjay R.
Thakkar, as forcing the victims down from the terrace, tying their legs and
hands; Ravi Rajaram Chavan, also making them get down; Dinesh P. Rajbar as seen
with a mashaal (flame torch) on the night of March 1, 2002 shouting
slogans; Bahadur Singh alias Jitu Chavan running towards Best Bakery with a
mashaal and sword in hand; Suresh Vasava, seen running towards the
Bakery with a sword and a mashaal; Sanabai Baria, on the next morning,
making victims get down, tying their legs and hands and assaulting them; and
Kamlesh Tadvi, in the morning, seen standing with those gathered.
Following Tufel, Raees
Khan Pathan, Shehzad Khan, Yasmin Sheikh, and Shailun also identified some of
the accused and gave an insight into how the attacks had unfolded that fateful
night.
Shehzad Khan, another
worker at the Best Bakery had appeared before the fast track court in Vadodara.
He was traumatised by the atmosphere in the court with the huge presence of
persons from Hanuman Tekri and their leaders. Without giving him a fair chance
to testify, the judge declared him of unsound mind, a fact that drew mention
from the apex court in its famous judgement. In the special leave petition filed
by Zahira Sheikh with the CJP in the Supreme Court, Shehzad’s affidavit
recording events as he remembered them had also been filed.
Ironically, this bakery
worker was in the box on November 3, 2004, the day of Zahira Sheikh’s infamous
press conference in Vadodara. The same afternoon, Shehzad identified 12 accused
by face and name including: Raju Baria, Mahendra V. Jadhav, Pankaj V. Gosai,
Jagdish C. Rajput, Shailesh A. Tadvi, Kamlesh B. Tadvi and Ravi Rajaram Chavan.
In addition, he identified accused Dinesh Rajbar as assaulting him with a sword,
Sanjay Thakkar as extorting money from him before attacking him, Jitu Chavan
with a sword, Sanabhai with a sword and Suresh Vasava with a sword. Similarly,
five accused were identified by Raees Khan, another bakery worker, and another
five by Yasmin Sheikh.
Apart from
identification of the accused, witnesses have identified the presence of other
surviving and dead victims at the site of the incident as well as the weapons
used in some of the attacks.
When the Supreme Court
ordered the re-trial on a day-to-day basis, the Mumbai court was directed to
conclude the trial by December 31, 2004. The unfortunate developments related to
Zahira Sheikh and her family resulted in their cross-examination stretching over
two months. The Mumbai court, which had earlier requested an extension until
December, has since asked for and been granted a second extension until
September 31, 2005. It is to be hoped that by then at the latest this historic
trial, a re-trial, will conclude.