April 20, 2006
Citizens for Justice and Peace (CJP)
Press Release
April 20,
2006
For Your Urgent Attention
and Publication
Intimidation and
Victimisation by Gujarat Police:
Notice to Gujarat Government
Justice AS Dave of the Gujarat HC has
issued notice to the Gujarat Government on the plea of victim
survivors of the Pandharwada massacre for stay and transfer of the
FIR-related investigations to CBI and posted the case for urgent
hearing on April 28, 2006.
After lengthy arguments made by Shri
Prakashbhai Thakker, senior counsel for the petitioners, the Court
passed the order. Meanwhile, no action can be taken by the Gujarat
Police on the investigation. The Citizens for Justice and Peace [CJP]
had moved the urgent criminal application following the issuance of
non-bailable warrants against victim survivors who had lost their
near and dear ones and Shri rais Khan, the CJP’s coordinator on
April 18.
A malafide FIR was registered against victim survivors in the early
morning of January 1, 2006 after the Gujarat High Court had
already passed an order transferring investigations to the CBI. The
Godhra Sessions Court had granted anticipatory bail to the survivors
and Shri Pathan on January 10, 2006 observing that the FIR was
obviously a counterblast meant to subvert the Gujarat HC order.
Interestingly, the sections invoked in the FIR against survivors and
Shri Pathan are normally those that require government sanction! The
simple act of retrieving dead remains of their loved ones has been
interpreted as an act of ‘inflaming religious sentiments by the
Lunawada police.’ Religious sentiments of whom?
The Gujarat police at Lunawada pressurized by the top echelons of
the police administration and Government continued to harass victims
and human rights activists to cover up the issue of illegal burial
in mass graves, of those killed in the Gujarat Carnage of 2002.
They attempted to get the anticipatory bail order cancelled in the
Gujarat HC, which was also turned down on April 5, 2006. On April 5,
2006 the Gujarat High Court passed a speaking order rejecting
the Gujarat State's appeal to cancel anticipatory bail granted by
the Sessions Court at Godhra. Though one of the conditions of the
High Court order formally allowed the police to apply for remand (a
practice in all cases), the victims and Shri Khan remained present
at the Lunawada court while arguments took place on April 17,
2006, the single-handed vindictiveness of the Gujarat police can
be seen, in that, they obtained non-bailable warrants by misleading
the court despite the fact that there were no orders asking that
these persons remain present in court on April 18, 2006. Despite
this order of the High Court to convert bail into regular bail, the
Gujarat police is not only using intimidatory tactics to browbeat
victims of a massacre and representatives of organisations
supporting the struggle for justice, but in fact attempting to
influence the investigation itself. In this entire matter, the
Gujarat police is the chief culpable party being responsible for the
undignified and hasty burials of victims of a mass crime. Today,
despite the fact that the matter has been seized of in the Gujarat
High Court, the Gujarat police functions with impunity and is trying
to subvert the investigation to escape liability for the illegal
and unauthorised burial of bodies of victims of a mass crime.
The non-bailable arrest warrants have been issued against Mehboob
Rasul Chauhan, Habib Rasul Saiyed, Sikander Abbas Shaikh, Kutubsha
Ayubsha Diwan and Gulam Ghani Kharadi who are victim survivors of
the ghastly massacre that took place in March 2002 and have lost
family members in the carnage. The police that is accused in the
crime of illegally mass burying bodies is today, under pressure from
the very top harassing victim and human rights defenders.
Vijay Tendulkar, President
Teesta Setalvad, Secretary
Pandharwada Mass
Graves Case A Brief
March 1, 2002
Offence of Mass Massacre in Pandharwada
in
Panchmahals district—CR 11/2002;
Acquittals by November 2002
March 2002-December 2005
Victim survivors of the mass massacre at
Lunawada made oral and written applications addressed to the DIG
Vadodara, Collector, Panchmahal, DYSP Godhra , Deputy Collector,
Lunawada, Mamlatdar, Khanpur. They even went before the Medical
Officer Panchal for recovery of dead bodies.
December 27, 2005
In third or fourth search for the
remains of their loved ones, relatives unearth skulls and bones in a
ravine near Paanam river, outside Lunawada. TV channels are present.
The Citizens for Justice and Peace [CJP] was contacted by victims
hence Shri Rais Khan was present. Teesta Setalvad, Secretary CJP
informs Gujarat Police about the discovery of the bodies.
December 28, 2005
PI Puwar from the Lunwada Police
station, goes to the house of Gulam Kharadi and shouts threatening
abuse at him. Jebunissa Gulam Kharadi, wife files a complaint at the
Lunawada police station against the police.
December 28, 2005
Ameenabehn Habib Rasool, a victim
survivor who lost her son in the bloody massacre along with CJP
filed a petition (Special Criminal Appln 1875/2005) praying for the
transfer of the entire investigation to the CBI.
In the affidavit annexed to the petition
dated December 29, 2005, Ameenabehn Habib Rasool who saw her 24 year
old son been slaughtered in front of her eyes, states that she was
shocked to hear DGP Bhargava of the Gujarat Police when confronted
with the mass graves, immediately speaking of initiating action
against victim survivors instead of showing concern and remorse over
the appalling developments. Similarly Collector Dhirendra Brahmbutt
went on to say that 'the anguished search of relatives for the
remains of their lost ones was an illegal act." There were several
contradictions too in the stance of the administration. While on
December 27, 2007 DGP Bhargava told the media that the bodies could
relate to the Pandharwada massacre, on February 28, 2005 he
contradicted himself and said that they could even belong to an
incident that took place prior to February 28, 2002. On the same
day, in contrast the Collector and SP of the district JK Bhatt were
categorical that they belonged to the Pandharwada massacre alone.
The petition that expressed strong
disenchantment and loss of faith in the Gujarat police also pointed
out that Lunawada town where all the survivors of the Pandarwada
massacre are rehabilitated has four major grave yards one
belonging to The Ghanchi Jamaat, two to The Sunni Muslim Jamaat,
and one more to Dawoodi Bohra Jamaat. This is a huge burial area
altogether totaling around 250 acre where major portion of the area
is vacant and is being used for cultivation. Why were not these
bodies given a dignified burial in this large area instead of
being surreptitiously outside the town ?
December 29, 2005
The Gujarat HC passed an order
transferring the investigation to CBI
December 2006
CBI issued summons to the victim
survivors to be present at the Godhra Circuit House for blood
sampling to enable DNA tests to proceed. CJP provided the CBI with a
list of the victim survivors with their relationship with the
deceased . Summons were received and signed by victims before
1-01-2006.
January 2, 2006
At 1.30 a.m., the Lunawada police file
an FIR (CR No. 1 3/2006) with Khanpur Police Station ) against the
victim survivors and Shri Rais Khan of the CJP under sections 192,
193, 201, 120(B), 295A and 297 of the IPC. The Sahara Samay News
Channel that had not only been present but also relayed the news
nationally and internationally were cleverly (or deliberately) not
made 'offenders to alleged offences named in the FIR.’ Interestingly
the FIR that has been lodged by a sanitary inspector invokes
sections that in normal circumstances requires state government
sanction!! Victim survivors who are the aggrieved party having lost
their near and dear ones to a massacre and thereafter been denied
the dignified right of burial are being blamed by the state of
Gujarat and its’ police for hurting religious sentiments. Of whom?
January 5-7, 2006
A unique and piquant situation took
place when victim survivors came to the Godhra Circuit House
trembling with fear as the state of Gujarat was accusing them of
committing crimes when all they had done was search in vain for the
remains of their lost ones. A specific assurance was given by the
Collector, Panchmahals and the SP, Panchmahals to the Secretary CJP,
Teesta Setalvad and Coordinator, Shri Rais Khan that the victim
survivors would not be arrested when they were giving blood
samples!!
January 9, 2006
The state government affidavit
contradicts itself by stating in para 4 of its affidavit dtd. 9th
Jan, 2006 that some bodies were unidentified, whereas later in
another sworn affidavit, states that all the dead bodies were
identified. Disgustingly, the state government claims that
persons/relatives identified bodies and then let them be in an
undignified pit without the dignity of last rites!! The callous and
cynical attitude of the state is so galling that they have no
problem stating falsehood upon falsehood in their affidavits. Later,
in para 8 of the affidavit the state of Gujarat claims that the dead
bodies were buried because nobody had come forward to claim the
skeletons!
January 10, 2006
Mehboobbhai Rasoolbhai Chauhan, a victim
survivor and all others accused in the FIR along with Shri Rais Khan
approached the Hon'ble Sessions Court, Panchmahals for
anticipatory bail and the Hon'ble Court by the judgment and order
dtd. 10th January, 2006 was pleased to grant anticipatory
bail. In the order, the Ld. Judge was pleased to observe that the
said FIR was prima facie filed to pre-empt the order of the Hon'ble
High Court and deter the investigating agency being the CBI from
investigating the offence pertaining the skeletons. The Godhra
Sessions Court had stated that the Lunawada police’s action in
registering an FIR was clearly “ a counterblast” to the matters
pending before the Gujarat HC. Thereafter, the 'accused' in the FIR
had approached the police several times, however the police did
arrest them and release them on regular bail as is required under
the law, deliberately not completing the formalities as
required by the order dated 10 th Jan, 2006. The state
police was deliberately keeping a sword hanging over the heads of
the victim survivors.
January 12, 2005
The local unit of the RSS and the VHP
stages a 40 person 'morcha' to the Collector's office stating that
'Hindu' sentiments have been hurt and that Shri Rais Khan and Teesta
Setalvad should not be allowed inside Lunawada.
February 1, 2006
Maksudabehn Yusufbhai Shaikh, widow of
murdered Yusufbhai Ahmedbhai Shaikh filed an application before the
PSI Khanpur Police station stating that she has information that her
husband's body has been buried at Lavanagam, illegally and without
last rites and therefore appealed that, in the presence of her
advocate and panchas, the body should be removed and she be allowed
to bury the body in accordance with Muslim rites. The same police
that is screaming itself hoarse about the 'illegal' act committed on
December 27, 2005 has simply not entertained this application.
Copies of the said application were given to DSP, Panchmahals, DYSP,
Panchmahals, Collector, and even the CBI.
February 7, 2006
Teesta Setalvad of the CJP files an
affidavit in Spl Cri Application 1875 of 2005 stating that at the
time of arguments before the Gujarat HC ON 29-12-2005, where the
government pleader was assisted by the local police, none of the
contentions or so called offences made out in CR No 1 3/2006 with
the Lunawada police station were submitted or made clearly
indicating that the FIR was a desperate afterthought meant to
adversely influence investigations. In this affidavit the repeated
harassments meted out to Shri Rais Khan were also detailed.
February 7, 2006
State of Gujarat files an application (Misc
Criminal Application 1613 of 2006) for cancellation of bail of those
named in the FIR CR 3/2006. Shri Prakashbhai Thakkar appears for
Shri Rais Khan Pathan and others.
February 10, 2006
The detailed affidavits submitted by
petitioner and victim survivor Ameenabehn and CJP
includes details of the procedure for burial of unidentified and
missing persons as per the Gujarat Municipalities Act and the
police norms and rules as stated by us in earlier affidavit. None
of the detailed factual claims are countered by the state of Gujarat
at all in any of its affidavits.
Victim
survivors have made it plain that the gameplan of the state of
Gujarat is to target them, victim survivors and
eye-witnesses as much as citizens groups who they approached
of our own free will to guide us through the legal battle does no
speak much for an administration and government that should be
showing compassion, remorse to its own people. If wrongs have been
committed, inadvertently or deliberately, the way to set them right
would be to make good what went wrong. Instead all of us have been
treated as common criminals and even today are facing non-bailable
warrants.
Victim survivors made it clear that it was they
who approached Teesta Setalvad of the CJP and asked them to be
present on 27-12-2005. They had made three unsuccessful attempts to
locate the remains of our near and dear ones before that. They were
not sure of any success this time. They had made repeated
attempts to get the authorities to listen to our anguished pleas for
the remains of our brutally killed relatives so that their souls
rest in peace. All this has been stated and documented by them in
subsequent affidavits, too. Yet this hostile and antagonistic
attitude by the administration reveals their true motive.
CDs of December 27, 2005 substantively prove what
the victim survivors and CJP saying to be true. They have placed the
CDs with transcripts before the Court.
February 21, 2006
The state government in it's rejoinder
affidavit indulges in unnecessary falsehoods stating that victim
survivor Ameenabehn Rasool who is the main petitioner was not aware
of the facts contained in the affidavit. The state of Gujarat, in
its rejoinder affidavit has
made a false statement saying that the
victim Maqsoodabibi had refused to exhume the dead body. To prove
their case, the petitioners (in their rejoinder to rejoinder
affidavits filed in the first week of March 2006) have annexed
affidavits of Maqsoodabibi and her mother-in-law namely Umravbibi
that contain details of the dead body of Yusufbhai Ahmedbhai Sheikh.
March 2, 2006
Maqsuda Yusuf Shaikh, widow of Yusufbhai
files as affidavit in the main Pandharwada matter (Special Criminal
Appln 1875/2005) pointing out shocking and grave efforts by the
Gujarat police to doctor records and in fact falsely create evidence
justifying the petitioners' claim that the Gujarat state police
simply cannot be trusted to handle an investigation against
itself in a fair and impartial manner.
In this affidavit,
Maqsuda states that
-
She made applications on dated
1.2.2006 and 6.2.2006 to the Prant Officer, Lunawada, Collector,
Panchmahal at Godhra, D. S. P. Panchmahal, Dy. S. P. Lunawada, C.
P. I. Lunawada etc. to get the dead body of her husband
Yusufbhai Ahmedbhai Shaikh, and after following legal procedure,
the same may be handed over to C. B. I. and after carrying out its
analysis in the Laboratory of Hyderabad through C. B. I. the dead
body should be handed over to her for burying in the local
Kabrastan as per Muslim law
-
The dead body of her husband Yusufbhai
Ahmedbhai Shaikh was not handed over to her either on dated
5.3.2002 or on any other day by any police, she has not made my
any thumb impression regarding receipt thereof. She states that
the police is trying to make a false case against her and refusing
to process her application to exhume/remove the body.
-
She states that the police has not
handed over dead body of her husband Yusufbhai Ahmedbhai Shaikh to
her or her mother-in-law (her mother in law also files an
affidavit) and she has not made any thumb impression anywhere
thereof.
-
She states that she and her in-laws
sent some applications and made representations to concerned
authorities to get dead body of my husband, however, till today
they have not been handed over the dead body of her husband
Yusufbhai Ahmedbhai.
-
She states that the police claim that
they have handed over the dead body of her husband to her on
dated 5.3.2002 is absolutely false and an irresponsible statement;
if the dead body of her husband Yusufbhai Ahmedbhai Shaikh was
handed over to her, then, male members of my community should
have cleaned his dead body i.e. should have performed the final
bathing rites and then, by wrapping him in the traditional white
coffin cloth, and after performing the Namaz of 'Janaza', the
final prayer, they would have buried him at the family's
Kabrasthan of their village or in Kabrastan of Pandarwada at
distance of 5 kilo meter from Lunawada. It is very clear that
nothing of this sort has happened and the police has no record
of it's so called version of handing over the body to me. It
appears therefore that the police is suppressing the truth.
-
She further submitted that if the dead
body of her husband was handed over to her on dated 5.3.2002 then
where was no need for her mother in law to make an application
in writing on dated 19.3.2002, and before making that application,
why would she have given copy without her thumb impression to her,
which was also produced by her before the Prant Officer on
February 2, 2006. Moreover, if the body had been obtained and
buries why would the family have made applications inquiring
whether he (Yusufbhai) is alive or dead to the Collector, Godhra,
Kheda etc. on many occasions after March 1, 2002. She also
questions as to why the police not even dignified her applications
with a response at the relevant time. In a daily newspaper namely
"Gujarat Today" dtd 3.4.2002 at page No.10 it was reported that
there is possibility that dead body of her husband Yusufbhai
Ahmedbhai Shaikh along with the dead bodies of three other
young men are buried in the nearby jungles, and though guardians
of all four young men informed Collector, Godhra in writing
about the same, no reply whatsoever has been given.
-
She states that if the police version
if handing over the body of her husband on 5.3.2002 was true, why
then would her mother in law Umravbibi make applications dated
19.3.2002 to the Collector, Panchmahal etc. and how did this
matter come to be reported in Gujarat Today News paper dtd.
3.4.2002.
-
This victim survivor also points out
that when the police carried out inquest panchnama dated 5.3.2002,
she was not called to the site nor was she present. However, her
false name and presence has been recorded. No thumb impression or
signature of hers can be found o this inquest panchnama. The
Police inquest panchnama is said to have been carried out on
5.3.2002 during hours 16.00 to 16.45 P.M. and it has also been
stated at serial no.6 of the police report that the police had
seen that dead body on 5.3.2002 at hours 14.30 in and sent it to
the Medical Officer, Pandarwada
-
She points that this is an act of
obvious falsification of records in terms of her presence shows
that the police has, in fact, not carried out any inquest
panchnama. Besides this, I further state that, if so called
inquest panchnama was carried out during hours 16.00 to 16.45 on
dtd 5.3.2002 then how come the post mortem was performed at hours
4.30 PM (16.30) on dtd 5.3.2002. It also apparently appears that
even the date of receipt of the dead body mentioned in column no.
4 of the post mortem report shows that the date of receipt of the
dead body was written as 6 th March, 2002 and the 6
was changed to 5. She concludes that from the material and facts
mentioned above, it is clear that the police or the
administration has not handed over the dead body of my husband to
me either on date 5.3.2002 or on any other day thereafter.
March, 2006
Victim survivors and CJP file
600 pages of detailed affidavits, contradicting point by point all
the claims made by the respondent 1, state of Gujarat in their
affidavits. Ameenabehn Habib Rasool in her Rejoinder to Rejoinder
Affidavit dated March 2006 filed by respondent, state of Gujarat
states that:
· the
dead bodies were buried in the survey no. 69 on the banks of the
river 'Paanam'.
·
Through their own investigations,
petitioners learned that the said land
is 'forest land' as per the 7/12 village form. They have annexed the
copy of the village form. This proves that the local
administration ought not to have buried the dead bodies without
handing over the same to the survivors of the deceased.
·
Ameenabehn Rasool states categorically
that it was the victims who learnt
about the place where the dead bodies were actually buried, informed
the villagers and soon in presence of the electronic media the
skeletons were unearthed. Further, the petitioners state that it was
only because of the electronic media's exposure that the police
could not tamper with the skeletons and the local administration was
caught on wrong footing especially because the skeletons were found
from the forest land. Thus it was wise decision for the victims to
avoid the competent authorities under the control of the state
government.
· The
petitioners state that the CBI, which is
Respondent no. 2 be asked to seized
the case diaries and the weekly diaries of the police are required
to be seized immediately or they be asked to produce the same
forthwith so that the role of the state's police and the local
administration can be properly appreciated. The petitioners further
state that the respondent no. 1 has been given enough chance to
'tamper' with the evidence.
·
The petitioners state that the 'role' of
the
state government in not protecting its
citizens and in defending the accused has shown its ugly face in
several matters. The non-governmental organizers had to venture and
make sincere attempts to wipe of the tears of poor victims. That the
Hon'ble Supreme Court while deciding Criminal M. P. No. 3740-42/2004
in Writ Petition (Cri) No. 109/2003 in the matters of National Human
Rights Commission v/s The State Of Gujarat and allied matters had
observed that the non-governmental organizations be asked to do the
needful for poor victims; though the petitioner craves leave to rely
upon the said order at the time of the hearing of this writ
petition. Moreover, the petitioner no. 2 has made strenuous
efforts to enable justice to absolutely poor victims of the state.
March 2006
Special
Criminal Application Nos. 408 of 2006, petitioners who are also
victims survivors , Mehboobbhai Rasoolbhai Chauhan and Rasoolbhai
Ashrafbhai Sheikh have prayed for a transfer of entire
investigation of the alleged offences to the CBI
April 5, 2006
Gujarat HC
refuses to cancel anticipatory bail. On April 5, 2006 the Gujarat
High Court passed a speaking order rejecting the Gujarat
state's appeal to cancel anticipatory bail granted by the Sessions
court at Godhra. Though one of the conditions of the High Court
order of April 5, 2006, formally allowed the police to apply for
remand (an practice in all cases) and the victims and Shri Khan
remained present at Lunawada court while arguments took place on
April 17, 2006, the single-handed vindictiveness of the Gujarat
police can be seen in that they obtained non-bailable warrants by
misleading the court despite the fact that there were no orders
asking these persons to remain present in court on April 18, 2006.
April 18,
2006
The non-bailable
warrants have been issued against Mehboob Rasul Chauhan, Habib Rasul
Saiyed,Sikander Abbas Shaikh, Kutubsha Ayubsha Diwan and Gulam
Ghani Kharadi who are victim survivors of the ghastly massacre that
took place in March 2002. Shri Rais Khan of Citizen for Justice and
Peace has also been targeted by the issuance of non-bailable warrant
although there is no order directing the ‘accused’ to remain present
in Court. This is nothing short of an attempt to browbeat victims
who had keen searching in vain for the bodies of their lost ones.
Application for remand to police custody have been made against all.
Despite the
order of the High Court refusing to cancel the anticipatory bail
order and permitting the ‘accused’ to apply for nail under section
439, the Gujarat police is not only using intimidatory tactics to
browbeat victims of a massacre and representatives of organisations
supporting the struggle for justice but in fact attempting to
influence the investigation itself. In this entire matter, the
Gujarat police is the chief culpable party being responsible for the
undignified and hasty burials of victims of a mass crime. Today,
despite the fact that the matter has been seized of in the Gujarat
High Court, the Gujarat police functions with impunity and is trying
to subvert the investigation to escape liability for the illegal
and unauthorised burial of bodies of victims of a mass crime.
April 20, 2006
After lengthy arguments made by Shri
Prakashbhai Thakker, senior counsel for the petitioners, Justice AS
Dave of the Gujarat HC has issued notice to the Gujarat Government
on the petitioner’s plea for stay and transfer of the FIR-related
investigations to CBI and posted the case for urgent hearing on
April 28, 2006. Meanwhile no action can be taken by the Gujarat
Police on the investigation.
