The Best Bakery case (also called Tulsi Bakery case) was a legal case involving the burning down of the Best Bakery in Vadodara, India, on March 1, 2002. The incident, which resulted in the deaths of 14[1] (including 12 Muslims[2]), has come to symbolize the carnage, and the alleged complicity of the state government of Gujarat, during the 2002 Gujarat violence.[3]
Contents |
On March 1, 2002, communal frenzy enveloped Vadodara.[4] The Best Bakery, a small outlet in the Hanuman Tekri area of Vadodara,[3] was allegedly attacked by a mob, which burned down the bakery, killing 14 people, 12 of them Muslims.[5] This attack was part of the 2002 Gujarat violence.
Amnesty International reports that in many cases of the Gujarat violence, police recorded complaints in a defective manner, failed to collect witnesses' statements as well as corroborative evidence and did not investigate the responsibility of eminent suspects. The Best Bakery case was seen by human rights organizations in India as a test case given that what Amnesty calls "strong evidence" against the accused existed,[6] but the victims gained little justice.[5]
The day after the attack, Zaheera Sheikh filed the first informant complaint.[1] Sheikh, a 19-year-old during the incident, was a key and notable witness. She stated that she saw her family members burn to death. When the mob gathered, shouting communal slogans, her family fled to the terrace and some locked themselves in a first-floor room. The mob set the bakery on fire and killings continued from 6 pm to 10 am the next day. Her statements were recounted for many publications. Another notable witness was a tailor from Ahmedabad, Qutubuddin Ansari.[3]
On March 23, however, 37 of the 73 witnesses, including Sheikh, turned hostile, saying they had seen nothing the night of the attack.[3]
All of the 21 accused were acquitted on June 27, 2003 by a "fast-track court"[5][7] presided over by judge Abhay Thipse.[8] Other witnesses had suffered head injuries and were not in a mental state to give an accurate witness account. The state government pointed to the lapses by the police in "registering and recording of FIR" (First Information Report) and on the part of the prosecution in "recording of evidence" of witnesses in the Best Bakery case.[9]
Amnesty international criticized the judgment as "the lack of government commitment to ensuring justice to victims of the communal violence in Gujarat."[6] India's National Human Rights Commission described it as a "miscarriage of justice" and, along with other petitioners, argued that the case should be investigated by an independent agency. The Supreme court also expressed displeasure at the acquittal. Some critics pointed out that although 100 Muslims had been charged with involvement in the burning of the train, no Hindus had been charged with violence against Muslims. This, they believed, was because "the Gujarat state government had little interest in ensuring justice for the victims."[10]
The Indian Supreme Court also criticized the government. Chief Justice VN Khare said he had "no confidence" in the Gujarat government. The Supreme court demanded a retrial. Three Supreme Court judges ordered the head of Gujarat police and the chief secretary to appear before the court to explain their actions in the controversy.[2]
The judgement said "It was proved beyond doubt that a violent mob had attacked the bakery and killed 12 persons. However, there was no legally acceptable evidence to prove that any of the accused presented before the court had committed the crime." The judgement was critical of the police for delay in registering FIR and for not investigating the incident properly and harassing innocent people. It was reported that key witnesses in the case had lied in court out of fear for their lives as they had been given death threats. Key witnesses in the case include the wife and daughter of the bakery owner. According to their testimony to the police and the National Human Rights Commission, 500 people had attacked the bakery. They also accused party politicians of threatening and harassing them into withdrawing their testimony.[11]
The Gujarat government responded by pointing out many other cases where the guilty were left unpunished. Solicitor General Mukul Rohatgi cited the anti-Sikh riots of 1984 and said many of the accused are still free.[2]
The Gujarat government filed an amended appeal in the Gujarat High Court seeking retrial of the case. The appeal was admitted by the Gujarat High Court. After being indicted by the Supreme Court of India, the police registered a case against a Bharatiya Janata Party legislator for intimidating witnesses to the incident. The Government of Gujarat admitted there were lapses on the part of the police in registering and recording FIR in the case and on the part of the prosecution in recording the evidence of witnesses. It said the police had attempted to help the accused by not submitting names of the accused.
Thus 17 charged with murdering 14 people, were retried in a case beginning in 2004.[12]
Zaheera Sheikh retracted her statement again. She stated that the judgment passed by the Gujarat court was correct. She also stated that she had never met the legislator. She claims that she made all the statements under the pressure of NGO activist Teesta Setalvad.
The prosecution declared Zaheera Sheikh to be a hostile witness. A tape by Tehelka claimed that Zaheera had been bribed by an MLA. Masjlis-e-Shura, an apex decision-making body of Muslims, consequently declared Sheikh a 'dissembler', effectively ousting her from the Muslim community. The organization gave as its reason that Zaheera was "tarnishing [the community's] image by making false statements."[13]
Sheikh was sentenced by the Indian Supreme Court to one year in prison for perjury in the murder, after being found guilty by the court of lying. She was also fined 50,000 rupees (US$1,000), which, if unpaid, would increase her time in prison by another year.[14]
In February 2006, a court in India convicted nine of the 21 people of murder, sentencing them to life imprisonment. It acquitted 8 others, while issuing warrants for the arrest of four missing persons.[15]
The judgement, called "landmark" by BBC journalist Sanjoy Majumder, brought the case to an end. The case has the legacy of being "one of the country's most controversial and high profile trials."[16]
A key witness petitioned the Mumbai High Court claiming that her depositions and identifications were false as misguided by Teesta Setalvad and requested re-recording of evidence.[17][18]