READ ALSO

Maya Kodnani given electric shock therapy

'Ex-Gujarat minister Maya Kodnani suffering from suicidal impulse'

Victims of the Godhra riots from Naroda Patiya and Gulberg society (File photo)

Crying relatives of the convicts after the pronouncement of the verdict on Naroda Patiya massacre

AHMEDABAD: Gujarat high court, on Wednesday, granted bail to Maya Kodnani , former minister and “kingpin” of the 2002 Naroda Patia massacre case in which 97 people were killed, on grounds of her sickness and possible delay in trial.While ordering her release, a bench of Justice V M Sahai and Justice R P Dholaria suspended her 28-year-long sentence imposed by the special SIT court in August 2012.Kodnani is the first of 32 convicts to come out on bail pending appeal before the HC.While convicting her, the trial court had observed that she was “tremendously favoured” by Gujarat police and all investigators had taken “great care” to see that she was not booked. On the roles of Kodnani and another main accused Babu Bajrangi, the court said, “The communal hatred displayed by the communally surcharged mob was on account of instigation by Kodnani and Bajrangi or on account of some vested interest who wants division of society on communal bases.”In her petition, Kodanani had stated that she suffers from intestinal tuberculosis, heart ailment, spinal problem as well as severe depression. She had said that she is required to take electric shocks from time to time, and was given such treatment earlier this year, when she was released on temporary bail.Kodnani, a professional doctor and the only woman to have been held guilty in the post-Godhra riots cases, has challenged her 28-year jail term. She has demanded bail on the ground that her appeal questioning the lower court’s verdict is not likely to be heard in the near future.Besides, she had questioned the lower court’s evaluation of evidence. She claimed that the 11 witnesses, who nailed her, had given statements with discrepancies. She also claimed that they spoke at a belated stage and theirs were embellished versions, and the court should have scrutinized them before accepting them.While a witness had alleged that Kodnani fired from a gun and a person sustained injury, it was established that the person in question was not injured at all. It has been alleged that the court accepted testimonies of witnesses in part and rejected certain portions.Furthermore, Kodnani claimed that the court should not have believed the witnesses’ entire version, when it did not believe in a part.