Supreme Court appointed-SIT probed Naroda Gam riots case with 'preconceived notion', says trial court

The special trial court, which acquitted all 67 accused including former BJP minister Maya Kodnani in the Naroda Gam massacre case of 2002 post-Godhra riots, has observed in its judgement that the manner in which Supreme Court appointed-Special Investigation Team (SIT) investigated the case "casts full doubt on the investigation that it was one-sided and the investigating officer had an ulterior motive."

On April 20, the special trial judge Shubhada Krishnakant Baxi pronounced the order, acquitting all 67 accused from the case in which 11 Muslims were burnt alive at Naroda Gam locality. The 1728-page judgement was made public only on Tuesday. The judgement in Gujarati language has discarded evidence and testimonies of witnesses while saying that SIT conducted the investigation with a "preconceived notion".

This is the first time that the Supreme Court-appointed agency has been criticised by a court. In 2008, SIT was given the task to investigate nine major rioting cases including Naroda Patiya, the Gulbarg Society massacre, the killing of three British nationals in Prantij, Godhra train burning case, among others. Apart from the Prantij case where six accused were acquitted due to witnesses turning hostile and lack of evidence, the SIT was successful in convicting a large number of accused in all other cases.

Also Read: A week on, SIT yet to get copy of Naroda Gam judgement it intends to challenge

It is the same SIT which also probed the complaint of Zakia Jafri, wife of slain Congress leader Ahsan Jafri murdered in the Gulbarg Society massacre, against the then chief minister Narendra Modi and others from the riots. The SIT had filed a closure report, giving a clean chit to Modi and others. Last year, the Supreme Court while praising the SIT upheld the closure report.

In the Naroda Gam case, the principal sessions judge said that this offence was first investigated by Gujarat policemen including then police inspectors- V S Gohil, PN Barot, Tarun Barot and RC Pathak and then the SIT. She has said that an "extensive and thorough investigation" was conducted and it can't be said that "there was any error in the (first) investigation."

"In the further investigation of SIT when new evidence appeared to be different from previous findings, it was the duty of the investigating officer to verify the new evidence. But without verifying, on the basis of mere statements, the SIT filed the chargesheet, which casts complete doubt on the investigation and it can be said that it was one-sided with a preconceived notion," the judge has remarked.

Maya Kodnani

Meanwhile, the court has also believed in the alibi produced by the accused including Kodnani, Babubhai Patel alias Babu Bajrangi, among others. The court has said that the SIT officials didn't verify or investigated the alibi plea of the accused and that they were not at the scene of the offence as alleged. Kodnani was accused of leading the frenzied mob that went on a killing spree.

In her defence, she had brought Union Home Minister Amit Shah as an alibi to say that on that day she was not at the crime scene. The court has believed her alibi. The court believed the former BJP minister was in the Gujarat assembly, then Sola civil hospital, her maternity hospital and went home.

Babu Bajrangi

The judgement also questions contradictory statements of the witnesses many of whom recorded their statements after a gap of six years. The court also refused to believe the "sting operation" conducted by journalist Ashish Khetan involving Babu Bajrangi. The court has found that the SIT didn't investigate deletion of many footage which was not for "journalistic purposes." The court has also observed that Bajrangi couldn't have been present at the crime scene since he was convicted in Naroda Patiya massacre which was about 3 km from this case.