Rejects a plea filed by the CBI seeking death penalty for three; convicts seven others who were previously acquitted by a lower court.

Fifteen years after the gang rape of pregnant 19-year-old Bilkis Bano during the post-Godhra riots, the Bombay High Court on Thursday upheld the conviction of 11 accused and set aside the acquittal of seven others.

A Division Bench of Justice V.K. Tahilramani and Justice Mridula Bhatkar in its 430-page judgment said while the probe conducted by the Gujarat police was “flawed with a dishonest investigation,” the evidence and statements given by Bilkis Bano were “completely trustworthy.” According to the prosecution, on March 3, 2002, Bilkis Bano’s family was attacked by a mob at Randhikpur village near Ahmedabad during the post-Godhra riots and seven members of the family were killed.

Case transferred

The trial had begun in Ahmedabad. However, after Ms. Bano expressed apprehensions that witnesses could be harmed, and moved the Supreme Court, the case was transferred to Mumbai. A special court in Mumbai had on January 21, 2008 convicted and sentenced 12 men to life imprisonment. One of them died subsequently.

The order of the bench came on appeals of those convicted in 2008 and the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) plea for death penalty for three.

Reacting to the verdict, Ms Bano said her rights as a woman and a mother had been violated in the most brutal manner, and Thursday’s order “vindicated the truth” and confirmed her faith in the judiciary.

The bench confirmed the conviction and sentence of 11 convicted by the trial court and dismissed the appeal filed by Jaswantbhai Nai, Govindbhai Nai, Shailesh Bhatt, Radheshyam Shah, Bipinchandra Joshi, Kesharbhai Vohania, Pradip Modhiya, Bakabhai Vohania, Rajubhai Soni, Mitesh Bhatt and Ramesh Chandana.

The court also, set aside the acquittal of five policemen —Narpatsingh Patel, Idris Saiyed, Bhikhabai Patel, Ramsingh Bhabhor, R.S @ Ramabhai Bhagora — and two doctors — Arunkumar Prasad and Sangeeta Prasad.

The court convicted them under Section 201 (causing disappearance of evidence of offence, or giving false information to screen offender) and Section 218 (public servant framing incorrect record or writing with intent to save person from punishment) of the Indian Penal Code. They have all been sentenced to the period of imprisonment undergone by them and fine of ₹5,000 and ₹ 15,000 for both the offences respectively. The court granted them eight weeks to deposit the fine and also directed that the amount be paid to Ms Bilkis Bano by way of compensation.

While convicting them, the court said, “Not writing the names of the accused and the material portion of the offence in the FIR as also causing disappearance of the evidence was clearly done with intention to screen the accused from legal punishment. Moreover, accused created such an information in respect of the offence which they knew was false. This shows that the police accused have committed offences under Sections 201 & 218 of IPC. However, the omissions on the part of the police accused are so grave and so obvious that their malafides and intentions are very apparent.”

Doctors in the dock

The court noted, “It is evident that they (doctors) were not only casual in conducting the postmortem but suppressed the material information by way of omission. All the acts of commission and omission of the police and the medical officers cannot be examined in isolation but they are well connected with each other in a chain of suppression of facts causing disappearance of the evidence with intent to screen the offenders and save them from punishment. Hence, their acquittal deserves to be set aside.”

The order read, “The postmortem conducted by the doctors were perfunctory and manipulated and done in order to cause disappearance of evidence and to screen the offenders.”

The court also said, “In our considered opinion and after close scrutiny of the evidence, we could read between the lines which show that the medical officers have completely failed to perform the postmortem of all the bodies as is expected under the law. The medical officer, who is entrusted to perform the postmortem of the dead bodies, is duty bound to give all details of the injuries and the cause of death.”

While rejecting the plea of the CBI seeking death penalty for three accused namely Jaswantbhai, Govindbhai and Shailesh, the court said, “though such crime is not justifiable and is shunned, we are of the view that it is not a case wherein the sentence imposed would be completely inadequate and would not meet the ends of justice.”