Latest news with #SukanyaShantha
The Wire
04-08-2025
- Politics
- The Wire
Malegaon Terror Blast Judgment: How the Crucial Witnesses Prosecution Dropped Impacted the Case
Government Sukanya Shantha Just as the prosecution's reasons for suppressing certain key witnesses are unclear, it is equally unclear why the court did not exercise its authority to summon these witnesses. Mumbai: Since the trial for the 2008 Malegaon terror blast commenced in 2018, the prosecution examined 323 witnesses over a span of seven years. In the process, it dropped several witnesses, without providing any explanation as to why. The special National Investigation Agency (NIA) court felt that these witnesses had been 'crucial' in establishing the chain of events. The decision to drop these witnesses, said special NIA judge A.K. Lahoti, gave the scope to draw an 'adverse inference' against the prosecution. The 1036-page judgement was made available on August 1, a day after the court acquitted all seven accused – including BJP leader and formed member of parliament Pragya Singh Thakur and serving Army officer Prasad Purohit. In it, the court has raised questions about the prosecution's intention to drop several crucial witnesses who the court observed would have helped connect the missing dots in the case. Besides Thakur and Purohit, five other persons – Major Ramesh Upadhyay (retired), Ajay Rahirkar, Sameer Kulkarni, Sudhakar Chaturvedi were also acquitted by the NIA court on July 31. The acquittal, the court has observed, was an outcome of the prosecution's failure to bring sufficient evidence. Even with 'grave suspicion', the court was not able to punish the accused persons, as 'mere suspicion is not enough', the court observed. According to the Anti-Terrorism Squad's case, which was later taken up by the NIA, Purohit has allegedly founded an organisation 'Abhinav Bharat' in 2006 and had attempted to establish a 'Hindu rashtra [nation]' which would have its own constitution, flag and 'government in exile' to be run from either Israel or Thailand. As a part of this agenda, the accused persons had come together and carried out the terror blast in Malegaon. Special public prosecutor Avinash Rasal took over the case soon after the earlier special public prosecutor Rohini Salian made a dramatic exit from the case in 2015 claiming that she was given instructions to 'go soft' on the accused persons charged in the case. She had claimed that she had received the instructions from 'higher ups'. Since Salian's exit, Rasal has been involved in the case for close to a decade. Among the many witnesses that the prosecution decided to drop are those who could have helped establish the movement of the alleged bombers days before the blast occurred. Ramchandra Kalsangra and Sandeep Dange One of the witnesses that the prosecution decided to drop without any cogent explanation is the person whose user ID and phone number was used to book tickets. According to the ATS's case, which was later taken over by the NIA which eventually filed a chargesheet in 2016, one witness named Vilok Sharma had used his account and his phone number to book the train tickets for two absconding accused persons, Ramchandra Kalsangra and Sandeep Dange, to travel from Pune to Indore. The two, according to both the ATS and the NIA, were accused of planting the bombs. Another person, Praveen Takkalki alias Pravin Mutalik, who the ATS had earlier accused of participating in the blast along with the two absconding accused was eventually discharged from the case after the NIA did not find any evidence against him in 2017. The judgment, narrating the NIA's case, points to Sharma's role in getting the tickets booked under fake names – Balwant Pathak and Mansingh – instead of their real names Ramchandra Kalsangra and Sandeep Dange. Their travel to Pune, where the RDX explosive was allegedly procured from Purohit and then to Indore where the absconding accused had allegedly assembled, planted, fitted the explosive on the LML Freedom motorcycle, were fundamental to the investigation. Also read: Malegaon Blast Trial: 1,087 Hearings, Inexplicable Orders and Victims Who Refused to Relent The court said although the facts of the case create 'grave suspicion' against the accused, mere suspicion was not enough to convict them. The court finally had to give the 'benefit of the doubt' and acquit the seven persons facing trial in the case. The travel to Pune and Indore was crucial not just to establish the movement of the absconding accused but also their otherwise loosely hanging links with army officer Purohit, who now stands acquitted in the case. 'Thus, Vilok Sharma from the aforesaid point of view was a material witness who could narrate about ticket details, booking details and traveling history. But, the prosecution has not examined Vilok Sharma. The prosecution has dropped the said witness... Therefore, in the absence of any evidence on this point, it cannot be said that, from his account the railway tickets were booked in the name of two fake persons and those were actually booked by AA-1 (Kalsangra) and AA-2 (Dange).' It is not just Sharma's statement but also the fact that an absolutely essential certificate, to be procured under Section 65 B of the Evidence Act, was not produced before the court. Without this certificate, electronic evidence is not admissible. The prosecution's case was that Kalsangra and Dange were in Pune around the same time as when Purohit had allegedly procured the RDX, i.e. August 8 to August 11. These finer details of the conspiracy and procurement of the explosive needed step-by-step building up of the evidence. The prosecution, according to the NIA judge, had dropped that. Sharma was dropped from the list of witnesses even though his name cropped up in the examination of other witnesses, especially a senior railway executive and an ATS officer. The judgement says: 'Thus, only Vilok Sharma was the witness who could say about the booking of the aforesaid ticket. The material witness Vilok Sharma is not examined by the prosecution. Non examination of material witness without any explanation give rise to draw the adverse inference against prosecution.' Another witness Pramod Deshmukh, who according to the investigating agency had seen Kalsangra and Dange had seen them in Pune around August 8 and 11, was an 'eye witness' but dropped by the witness. Another important witness, the court points out, was the policeman who diffused the detonator but was not examined as a witness. Judge Lahoti writes: 'Officer API Sachin Gawade who has actually diffused the detonator as per the case of prosecution is not examined as witness. He was the only person who could narrate the exact condition of the detonator, the procedure carried out by him for diffusing the detonator and collection of remnants after diffusing. The non-examination of material witnesses give rise to adverse inference." 'Missing' In 2016, the NIA had informed the court that around 13 witness statements, recorded under section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) before a magistrate, had gone missing. The central agency had attributed this sudden and suspicious disappearance of documents to their constant ferrying between the trial and the higher courts. While the original copies of these statements had gone missing, the NIA had sought permission before the NIA court to use the photocopies of the document – which the court had granted. This permission was challenged by one of the accused persons in the Bombay high court, which later stayed the trial court's order and had directed the NIA to file a fresh application authenticating that the photocopies were indeed a replica of the original. Interestingly, the NIA did not file that application, and the witnesses were examined solely on whether their testimonies were recorded under Section 164 of the CrPC. In the absence of these Section 164 statements, the magistrate who recorded them should have been examined. However, the prosecution decided against it. The judgment notes, 'The aforesaid statements (recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C.) were neither presented to the witnesses nor was the concerned magistrate examined in such circumstances.' These 13 statements were crucial for proving the conspiracy meetings, the movements of the alleged bombers, and other key aspects of the case. At least two of these witnesses were essential to prove the conspiracy meetings where conversations purportedly on revenge on Muslims were discussed. While it is incumbent upon the prosecution to present important witnesses in court, when the prosecution fails to do so, the court could have done it. Section 311 of the CrPC empowers the court to summon witnesses it deems essential for the case. Just as the prosecution's reasons for suppressing certain key witnesses are unclear, it is equally unclear why the court did not exercise its authority to summon these witnesses. The prosecution examined a total of 323 witnesses in the case, of whom 39 turned hostile. However, public prosecutor Rasal did not initiate perjury proceedings against them, and nor did the court make any significant observations regarding the witnesses who refused to adhere to their original statements. The Wire is now on WhatsApp. Follow our channel for sharp analysis and opinions on the latest developments.
The Wire
19-07-2025
- Politics
- The Wire
Tortured by 'Gau Rakshaks' for a Decade, Maharashtra's Muslim Qureshis Are Boycotting Their Trade in Protest
Sukanya Shantha The decision, born of desperation, comes despite the fact that it directly impacts their livelihood and marks what is possibly the first time that such a coordinated and massive resistance to the violence is being seen from within the community. A Qureshi Jamaat meeting on the protest by the community. Photo: By arrangement. Mumbai: For over a month, butchers from the Muslim Qureshi community have been leading a unique protest across Maharashtra. In the face of violent attacks from self-proclaimed ' gau rakshaks ' or 'cow protectors' in the last decade, members of the community have decided to indefinitely stop dealing in buffalo or other bovine meat. The decision, born of desperation, comes despite the fact that it directly impacts their livelihood and marks what is possibly the first time that such a coordinated and massive resistance to the violence is being seen from within the community. The community's condition, members say, has worsened with the amendment to the Maharashtra Animal Preservation Act of 1976 in March 2015. The amendment, which received presidential approval after the Bharatiya Janata Party came to power in both the state and Union governments, banned the slaughter of animals belonging to the cow progeny in the state. This amendment prohibited the slaughter of bulls, bullocks, oxen, and cows for meat. Shortly after this change in the law, violence by Hindutva men claiming to be cow protectors also increased dramatically. 'Almost everyone in the community has been attacked' Helpless and targeted, the Qureshis – a marginalised Muslim community – under the banner of the Qureshi Jamaat, have been holding meetings at district and taluka levels across Maharashtra to convince the community to abandon the profession entirely. 'Our condition is already dire. We need to do this to show the government the impact our decision will have, not just on us but also on the farming community of the state,' said Aziz Qureshi, who heads the Qureshi Jamat in Nanded. The boycott campaign began in Nagpur over a month ago and gradually spread across the state. Almost every day, an event or two is being organised across districts. The community is also deliberating on how to overcome the economic setback that they are suffering with the boycott in effect. A video screengrab from one of the meetings. Earlier this week in Nanded, many men engaged in butchering gathered at the district headquarters. 'Almost everyone has experienced being apprehended, harassed, or violently attacked by Hindutva men,' Aziz claims. He says these attacks have persisted even though butchers in the district have long stopped dealing in beef. 'Buffaloes are not banned, but it doesn't matter to the attackers. All they see is a Muslim man dealing in meat; and that's enough for them to launch themselves at him. Most of these attacks are done in connivance with local police,' alleged one butcher, who was brutally beaten last year. He claimed the police refused to register his complaint even though videos of the attack were circulated across social media platforms. Laws of the land Buffalo slaughter, under the amended law, is subject to restrictions. Before a buffalo can be slaughtered, the owner must obtain a certificate from a veterinary doctor confirming that the buffalo is unfit for milking and not pregnant. Only with this 'fitness certificate' can buffaloes be sent to a slaughterhouse. Farmers, who rely on their cattle for tilling farms and milk production, depend on the Qureshis when the animals age. This is the only way they can earn money to invest in younger buffaloes. With the Qureshi community unanimously deciding to abandon the profession, farmers, mostly of marginal land holding and belonging to Bahujan communities, will be severely affected, especially at a time when farmer suicides are alarmingly high in the state. Government records show 767 farmers died by suicide between January and March this year alone. Many in the community claim the government has systematically closed slaughterhouses in talukas and failed to appoint veterinary doctors in areas with significant Muslim populations. For instance, in Nanded district, Aziz claims veterinary doctors have not been appointed at the taluka level for over 10 years. There is only one functional veterinary unit in the district headquarters. 'With no certificates or abattoirs available, many butchers have resorted to slaughtering in their homes,' a local community leader in Nanded shared. Another butcher from Parbhani, reiterating the point, added that, alongside legal issues, slaughtering in residential spaces also poses serious health concerns. 'The municipal authorities are aware of the condition, but they do nothing to help us in cleaning up,' the butcher from Parbhani says. Slaughtering at ones own house is illegal and FIRs have been registered enmasse against many butchers in Marathwada region. 'Keeping a check' On July 14, Minister of State for Home (Rural), Pankaj Bhoyar, announced in the legislative council that the government will introduce a new law against beef smuggling in the state and withdraw cases against 'gau rakshaks' who have been 'taking the lead' in exposing beef transport. This law will supplement the existing prohibition on cow slaughter. The government is also deliberating over invoking the stringent Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA) against 'beef smugglers'. Deliberations over this new law began after the seizure of 57,000 kilograms of meat in two containers at Lonavala in March 2025. The police claimed the meat was 'beef' and it was intercepted while being transported to Jawaharlal Nehru Port Trust (JNPT) for export. A Special Investigation Team (SIT) has been formed to investigate the case. The BJP-led government's response to alleged beef seizures has been disproportionate compared to the threats, extortion, and violence the Qureshi community faces regularly. Gau rakshaks are celebrated as crucial vigilante groups 'keeping a check' on illegal slaughtering in the state, and incidents of violence are reported only when public pressure forces police action. Latur-based activist Juned Atar who is the editor of the page Marathi Musalman, says the Qureshi Muslim identity is being systematically criminalised. Having closely tracked incidents of violence in the state, he observes a pattern. 'The vigilante groups are well-networked across states. As soon as a transporter leaves one region, tip-offs are sent to vigilante groups through various networks. Often, they arrive with a police contingent,' Atar says. He notes that local transporters, often merely drivers and not cattle owners, are violently attacked, with the attacks invariably justified in the name of gau raksha. Recently in Latur, Atar says, a man was apprehended while transporting cattle. 'The cattle were only being moved, not taken for slaughter. But the local police stopped the transport, and the cattle were handed over to a local gau raksha organisation,' he says. Within days, these cattle were seen in the market for slaughtering. 'With the help of local activists, he compelled the police to register an FIR against the so-called gau rakshaks,' Atar adds. But such cases are just few and far between. Kaizer Patel, an All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen (AIMIM) party activist and lawyer in Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar district, says the economic impact is 'beyond the state's imagination.' 'It's not just the butchers; the entire economy dependent on it will be affected,' he said. After consulting Qureshi organisations across Maharashtra, he estimates conservatively that 5,000 cattle are slaughtered daily. 'Even if one animal is sold for around Rs. 20,000, the sales amount to roughly Rs 300 crores per month,' he says. He also mentions private companies operating on a larger scale. 'In Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar alone, over 800 buffaloes are sold daily to a large private company at over Rs. 40,000 per buffalo. The monthly turnover in just one district reaches Rs 100 crores,' he explains. Besides the Qureshis and farmers, those involved in transportation, catering, and the hotel industry will also be impacted by the decision, Patel says. The Wire is now on WhatsApp. Follow our channel for sharp analysis and opinions on the latest developments.
New Indian Express
04-07-2025
- Politics
- New Indian Express
Stereotyping wildlife crime must stop
Questionable validity of executive action At the outset, the alerts by WCCB and MP PCCF do not specify the legal basis of their authority to pass such measures for surveillance. The Wildlife Protection Act, 1973 (WPA) mandates the requirement of 'reasonable ground' of the commission of a crime by a person before conducting any search, seizure or arrest. On the contrary, the alerts do not lay out any reasonable ground. They only mention individual cases from years ago (in the national memo of the WCCB) and name these communities, which is opposite to the purview of WPA. Further, it favours intrusive surveillance and prejudicial treatment against the tribals. It has put alleged hunting or nomadic communities subject to surveillance just on the basis of their caste/community is prima facie contrary to these legal standards. The alerts are against the right to privacy for being disproportional, without legitimate state interest and devoid of any legal basis. Recently, the Supreme Court in the cases of Sukanya Shantha vs. Union of India and in Amanatullah Khan vs. The Commissioner of Police took note of the stereotyping and selective targeting of formerly criminalised Vimukta communities. It strongly directed the necessity of preventive measures to safeguard such communities from being subjected to inexcusable targeting or prejudicial treatment. Legacy of manufacturing criminality in the forests As mentioned, there is an uncanny similarity between the alerts and the caste-colonial Criminal Tribes Act, 1871. The erstwhile act classified around 200 Nomadic & Semi Nomadic Tribes as hereditary & habitual criminals addicted to 'systematic commission of crime'. The legislation gave blanket powers to the executive to arbitrarily classify communities, put them under surveillance and restrict their movement by forcing them to reside in settlements created by the government. Dominant caste 'village headmen' were given the power to monitor and inform about the movements of these tribes/communities. The law effectively laid the ground for 'modern' surveillance infrastructure where detailed registers were maintained to monitor the movements of these communities branded as criminals. Even though the law was repealed in 1952, many laws about repeat offenders have kept the main idea of the CTA alive and relevant today.
