1 / 189

JANSANGHARSH MANCH 104, Maharanapratap Complex, Ellisbridge, Ahmedabad. Ph. 079-2657 7280

JANSANGHARSH MANCH 104, Maharanapratap Complex, Ellisbridge, Ahmedabad. Ph. 079-2657 7280. The Government’s version of the cause of fire The case in the first charge-sheet dated 22.5.2002. The first charge sheet described the burning of the S6 in the following manner,

cricket
Télécharger la présentation

JANSANGHARSH MANCH 104, Maharanapratap Complex, Ellisbridge, Ahmedabad. Ph. 079-2657 7280

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. JANSANGHARSH MANCH 104, Maharanapratap Complex, Ellisbridge, Ahmedabad. Ph. 079-2657 7280

  2. The Government’s version of the cause of fire • The case in the first charge-sheet dated 22.5.2002 • The first charge sheet described the burning of the S6 in the following manner, • “Some of the karsevaks had altercations with Muslim tea vendors regarding tea at the Godhra Station. While the train which arrived 7.43 am, started from Godhra Railway Station at 07.47 hours towards Vadodara, someone from the train pulled the chain and stopped the train. Cont…. 5.1.1

  3. The Government’s version of the cause of fire • The case in the first charge-sheet dated 22.5.2002 • Several people belonging to Muslim community who were residing in and around Signal Falia situated near Godhra railway station, formed an illegal assembly and gathered at open space near Parcel House at Godhra railway station and started throwing stones on the passengers and the Sabarmati Express train. ” 5.1.1

  4. The Government’s version of the cause of fire • The case in the first charge-sheet dated 22.5.2002 • “..Meanwhile, the train started once again and when it reached ‘A’ cabin of Godhra railway station at 08.05 hours, the accused to accomplish their common objective of criminal conspiracy stopped the train by turning the disc between coach No.S-5 and S-6. Cont…. 5.1.2

  5. The Government’s version of the cause of fire • The case in the first charge-sheet dated 22.5.2002 • At that time the accused armed with deadly weapons and highly inflammable fluids filled in cans and shouting slogans ‘ Pakistan Zindabad’, ‘ Hindustan Murdabad’, burnt down the coach No. S-6 which contained maximum number of Karsevaks with the motive of killing them and others…” 5.1.2

  6. The Government’s version of the cause of fire • The case in the first charge-sheet dated 22.5.2002 • In short, the first charge-sheet did not allege so called conspiracy of 26th February by Umarji, did not allege the procurement of petrol from Kalabhai’s pump, did not allege the role of Salim Panwala of instigating others to pull the chain twice, did not allege the entry of any of the conspirators inside the S6 coach, did not allege the use of Petrol to burn the coach. Cont…. 5.1.3

  7. The Government’s version of the cause of fire • The case in the first charge-sheet dated 22.5.2002 • It did not even specifically mention where the S6 coach had stopped before being set on fire nor did it give any specific timing of the “setting of fire” to the S6. 5.1.3

  8. The Government’s version of the cause of fire • The case in the first charge-sheet dated 22.5.2002 • What was the exact position of the S6 coach while it burnt ? This question is of great importance since the evidence of eye witnesses have to evaluated on the basis of their relative positions. 5.1.4

  9. The Government’s version of the cause of fire • The case in the first charge-sheet dated 22.5.2002 • The first panchnama of objects lying outside the coach and the position/ situation of the coach was made on 27.2.2002 between 13.00 hrs and 15 hrs. (Sr. No. 3 of CS). The place of offence (position of the S6 coach, which was ofcourse not there at that time as it was already shifted to the yard on line no. 10 at about 11.30 am) was recorded to be near the electric post No. 468/33. Cont…. 5.1.5

  10. The Government’s version of the cause of fire • The case in the first charge-sheet dated 22.5.2002 • as pointed out to the panchas by the complainant Shri Rajendrarao R Jadav. It was also stated that the distance from the A cabin to the Godhra junction board ( on platform No.) was 2150 feet. 5.1.5

  11. The Government’s version of the cause of fire • The case in the first charge-sheet dated 22.5.2002 • Thus as per the Driver Rajendrarao, S6 was near 468/33. Actually it was next to the electric post No. 468/35 (as seen in the VHP photograph) which is about 60 feet nearer to the “A” cabin than the post 468/33. The post 468/35 is clearly visible from the A cabin and the ASM had an unobstructed view from his cabin window but to avoid stating the truth, the railway employees did not disclose the true position of S6. 5.1.6

  12. The Government’s version of the cause of fire • The case in the first charge-sheet dated 22.5.2002 • Next question to determine are the timing of the sighting of the smoke and the fire: • Shri Rajendra Prasad Meena, the ASM in `A’ Cabin has stated at Exh.26 that at 8.25 he had seen smoke coming out of a coach. • First he had seen smoke and thereafter he has seen the flames. He had informed the ASM as well as the Control immediately after seeing the smoke. 5.1.7 Cont….

  13. The Government’s version of the cause of fire • The case in the first charge-sheet dated 22.5.2002 • Shri Yusufali Saiyad, the Dy. SS has stated in his statement dated 27.4.2002, at Sr. No. 73 of CS that actually the driver had informed about the fire at 8.25 am and that Shri Khatija had informed the fire-brigade. 5.1.7

  14. The Government’s version of the cause of fire • The case in the first charge-sheet dated 22.5.2002 • Shri Meena has said that he had come down from cabin at 8.35 am and then we went near the S-6 coach and at that time the flames were leaping from the coach. • He has also said that Shri Khatija, the Incharge Station Superintendent had also come near `A’ cabin by 8.30 to 8.35 am. 5.1.8

  15. The Government’s version of the cause of fire • The case in the first charge-sheet dated 22.5.2002 • Shri Mohabbatsinh Jhala, the PSI of the Godhra Railway Police, has deposed at Exh.60 that he had reached the S-6 coach around 8.15 am and before that he had reached the platform around 8.10 am. From railway platform, he had reached the train within five minutes. 5.1.9

  16. The Government’s version of the cause of fire • The case in the first charge-sheet dated 22.5.2002 • Shri Mohabbatsinh Jhala said that he had resorted to lathi-charge before 8.30 am to disperse the crowd near the A cabin and at that the Godhra police had also lobbed tear gas shells from near the A cabin. Thereafter, he had ordered firing and because of all these actions, the mob had dispersed within 10 minutes. 5.1.10

  17. The Government’s version of the cause of fire • The case in the first charge-sheet dated 22.5.2002 • Shri Raju Bhargav, the DSP, who had deposed at Exh.86, had said that he had gone from the railway station towards the train in his vehicle. • While he was passing on the road touching signal faliya, he had not noticed any crowd on that road.. He had not seen any crowd except the passengers. He had reached the burning coach at about 8.30 am. 5.1.11

  18. The Government’s version of the cause of fire • The case in the first charge-sheet dated 22.5.2002 • From the timings narrated by the railway employees and police, it can be safely assumed that the actual fire ( flames) were seen around 8.25am to 8.30am. Prior to this time, smoke has been sighted by persons outside as well as passengers and the smoke had most likely started around 8.15 a.m. 5.1.12

  19. The Government’s version of the cause of fire • The case in the first charge-sheet dated 22.5.2002 • The official version has absolutely no explanation for the long duration of smoke generation (approximately ten to fifteen minutes) since their version of setting fire to the coach by pouring in 100 liters or so petrol inside the coach would have led to instant flame with an explosive speed since the heat energy conversion would be extremely fast due to the rapid burning of petrol. The chances of any survival would have been dim. 5.1.13

  20. The Government’s version of the cause of fire • The case in the first charge-sheet dated 22.5.2002 • Shri Raju Bishankumar Bhargava, Police Superintendent of Godhra, deposition before the commission is very important to understand the severity of the fire and the spped of its spread: He said that he had reached the burning coach at about 8.30 a.m. Cont…. 5.1.14

  21. The Government’s version of the cause of fire • The case in the first charge-sheet dated 22.5.2002 • He had seen people with black faces and with some burn injuries on the head, coming out of the coach.... seen ten to twelve passengers coming out of that coach.... They were coming out of the door on the Godhra side.... The injuries which he noticed on the passengers were on the upper part of their bodies.... he had not noticed any injury below their waist portion. 5.1.14

  22. The Government’s version of the cause of fire • The case in the first charge-sheet dated 22.5.2002 • Raju Bhargav said that he had not seen any raising of flames in the area of that coach which I could see from the door. I had seen only smoke in that area....I had not noticed any flames on the floor of the area between the two doors. I had also not smelt any inflammable fuel like petrol kerosene, diesel etc. 5.1.15

  23. The Government’s version of the cause of fire • The case in the first charge-sheet dated 22.5.2002 • Thus at about 8.30am people with superficial burn injuries were still coming out of the coach which did have fire and smoke inside. The injury report of about 40 persons would show that not a single person who escaped from S6 had any fire burns below the waist. 5.1.16

  24. Injured people

  25. Injured people

  26. Injured people

  27. Injured people

  28. Injured people

  29. Injured people

  30. The Government’s version of the cause of fire • Kerosene or Petrol ?? • Without any inflammable fluid being used by the “conspirators’ , the conspiracy theory would not have any takers. Would a conspiracy and least of all, a terrorist conspiracy under POTA make any sense, if there was no allegation of the conspirators acquiring some highly inflammable fluid to set fire to the S6 coach ?? But the question at that time was whether to allege the use of petrol or settle for the poor man’s fuel, the Kerosene?? 5.2.1

  31. The Government’s version of the cause of fire • Kerosene or Petrol ?? • The first panchnama of objects lying outside the coach and the position/ situation of the coach was made on 27.2.2002 between 13.00 hrs and 15 hrs. (Sr. No. 3 of CS). It was recorded that there were certain cement sleepers lying about fifty feet east of the electric post No. 468/36, which in turn, was in the north of the electric post No. 468/35. On these cement sleeper, there were one white and two black carboys of ten liter capacity. No liquid was found but smell of some fluid was coming out of the carboys. These carboys were sealed and sent for forensic examination. 15 parcels were collected of different objects for examination. 5.2.2

  32. The Government’s version of the cause of fire • Kerosene or Petrol ?? • The next panchnamas of the position /situation of the coach S6 was recorded on 28.2.2002 between 17.45 hrs to 19.35 hrs. ( Sr. No. 5 of CS1). The burnt residues from nine cubicles of S6 plus from toilets were collected, sealed in plastic bags and sent for forensic examination. 5.2.3

  33. The Government’s version of the cause of fire • Kerosene or Petrol ?? • The first FSL report of the analysis of the materials sent from outside as well as inside the coaches, covered by the above two panchnamas were given by a single report No. FSL/EE/2002/c/287 dated 20.3.2002 (at Sr. No. 285 of CS). 5.2.4

  34. The Government’s version of the cause of fire • Kerosene or Petrol ?? • In this report the objects and materials were reorganized to give new serial numbers and 48 samples were recorded. Out of these, 32 samples were from outside (covered by first panchnamas dated 27.2.2002) whereas 16 were covered by the second panchnamas dated 28.2.2002. 5.2.5

  35. The Government’s version of the cause of fire • Kerosene or Petrol ?? • The reliability of the report of the latter 16 samples is very doubtful since hundreds of onlookers and visitors including the Chief Minister/other ministers had visited the site as well as entered the S6 coach and therefore any material taken from inside the coach or outside on 28.2.2002 could be tampered and/or planted material. 5.2.6

  36. The Government’s version of the cause of fire • Kerosene or Petrol ??

  37. The Government’s version of the cause of fire • Kerosene or Petrol ?? • The report of FSL disclosed presence of residual petrol hydrocarbons in 25 samples and detected petrol in two of the three carboys found from the cement sleepers near the post no. 468/36, one of them being a white carboy with a white stopper bearing the inscriptions, “fortune” in English whereas the other was a black carboy. One plastic bottle with the word “brilliant” inscribed was detected to have HCl. The other 20 samples did not disclose the presence of any hydrocarbons or acid. 5.2.7

  38. The Government’s version of the cause of fire • Kerosene or Petrol ?? • Despite this FSL report dated 20.3.2002, being with the Investigation Officer, the first charge-sheet filed on 22.5.2002, did not make any specific allegation of the S6 being burnt by the use of petrol. Shri K.C.Bawa, the I.O. kept it vague - “At that time the accused armed with deadly weapons and highly inflammable fluids filled in cans and shouting slogans ‘ Pakistan Zindabad’, ‘ Hindustan Murdabad’, burnt down the coach No. S-6…”. Cont…. 5.2.8

  39. The Government’s version of the cause of fire • Kerosene or Petrol ?? • The big question is why the I.O. refused to specify the fluid that was allegedly used by the “conspirators” ??? 5.2.8

  40. The Government’s version of the cause of fire • Kerosene or Petrol ?? • To get an answer to this question, it is to noticed that initially the investigation began in the right earnest. The two petrol pumps near the Godhra station were sealed by the police on 27th Feb. 2002. The first pump was owned by M.H. & A Patel on Vejalpur road and the other was owned by Asgarali qurban Hussein (kalabhai). 5.2.9

  41. The Government’s version of the cause of fire • Kerosene or Petrol ?? • On 9.4.2002, 7 samples of petrol and diesel were collected from both these pumps and panchnamas were made. These samples ( 4 samples of diesel marked as A, B, E & F and 3 samples of petrol being marked as C, D (from kalabhai’s pump) and H (from M.H. & A Patel’s pump. They were sent for forensic examination to find out whether the petrol or diesel from these pumps could have been used to burn S6 coach. 5.2.10

  42. The Government’s version of the cause of fire • Kerosene or Petrol ?? • In his report, FSL/EE/2002/c/442, dated 26.4.2002, Shri D.B.Talati, Assistant Director, FSL, (at Sr. No. 286 of CS) while holding that A,B,E & F contained diesel and that C,D and H contained petrol, stated that he could not give a clear opinion whether the petrol detected in some samples in and around S6 as per the FSL report dated 20.3.2002 and the petrol detected in the C,D & H samples were from the same source! 5.2.11

  43. The Government’s version of the cause of fire • Kerosene or Petrol ?? • The fatal blow to the “Petrol theory” came from the two employees of Kalabhai’s petrol pump, namely Shri Prabhatsinh G Patel and Ranjitsinh G Patel who in their statement recorded u/s 162 on 10. 4.02, flatly denied having sold any loose petrol to any body and in fact stated that they did not sell loose petrol from their pump. Thus the police had no source from where they could allege that the accused had procured the petrol. Strangely, the police did not question any employee of M.H. & A Patel’s petrol pump. 5.2.12

  44. The Government’s version of the cause of fire • Kerosene or Petrol ?? • The Charge-sheet filed by K.C.Bawa on 22.5.2002, therefore created evidences to establish that the S6 coach was burnt from outside by the use of some inflammable liquid. For this purpose, Bawa “recorded” the statements of nine important eye witnesses between 27th February, 2002 and 15.3.2002, namely, Shri Janaklal K Dave, Rajeshbhai V Darji, Nitinkumar Harprasad Pathak, Dilipbhai U Dasariya, Muralidhar R Mulchandani ( reportedly, the present Vice-President of Godhra Nagarpalika), Dipakbhai M Soni, Harsukhlal T Advani, Chandrashekahr N Sonaiya and Manoj H Advani. (at Sr. Nos 76 to 84 of CS) 5.2.13

  45. The Government’s version of the cause of fire • Kerosene or Petrol ?? • All these nine persons, who declared themselves to be active members of V.H.P. made identical statements to the effect that they had gone to the Godhra station in the morning of 27.2.2002, to meet the Karsevaks who were coming from Ayodhya and give them tea and breakfast. 5.2.14

  46. The Government’s version of the cause of fire • Kerosene or Petrol ?? • They have then made the following identical statements: “ … the train was standing near “A” cabin; at that time, men, women and children numbering around 900-1000 persons from signal falia, started running towards the stationary train while howling and shouting; because of this me and other local activists ran towards where the train was standing and reached “A” cabin Cont…. 5.2.15

  47. The Government’s version of the cause of fire • Kerosene or Petrol ?? • and saw that people from signal falia came running there with weapons like dhariya, sword, iron pipes and sticks. Others started heavily stoning the train. These people were shouting like , ‘sale hinduonko kaat daalo, mandir banane jaate hai kaat daalo etc.. Five-six persons with carboys in their hands were sprinkling the fluid on one coach and they set it on fire and we kept standing at the side of A cabin. 5.2.15

  48. The Government’s version of the cause of fire • Kerosene or Petrol ?? • In this mob, I saw from the village of Godhra, Shri Role Amin Hussein Hathila ….” The nine eye witnesses thereafter, in their respective statements named around four muslims each including Haji Bilal and Kalota. Thus 36 muslims were named by these eyewitness and were arrested for burning down the coach from outside! Not a single of these nine eye witnesses who claimed to be standing by the side of A cabin, said a word about Binyamin Behra and others coming in the tempi with eight carboys of petrol, climbing the S6 coach by cutting open the vestibules etc… 5.2.16

  49. The Government’s version of the cause of fire • Kerosene or Petrol ?? • After creating the case of the burning of S6 coach from outside, K.C.Bawa started discovering any number of carboys from around the A cabin with traces of Kerosene to build up the case that the fluid used to burn S6 was “Kerosene”. Three carboys were discovered between 29th March, 2002 to 5.4.2002 and these were allegedly found from three accused, namely, Haji Bilal, Abdul Majid Dhantiya and Kasim Biryani (Discovery panchnamas at Sr. Nos. 16 dt 29.3.02, 18 30.3.02 and 19 dt 5.4.02 of CS). 5.2.17

More Related