According to official sources Muslims and Hindus were killed, and as many as , Muslims and 40, Hindus were rendered homeless. About are still reported missing. But we know that official estimates are always low and in this case the estimates are from the Gujarat government. Civil rights and Muslim groups report that more than 2, Muslims were killed by Hindu mobs. Muslim mobs too were active and exacted retribution wherever possible.
|Published (Last):||25 August 2014|
|PDF File Size:||13.47 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||19.92 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Himatnagar Location of major incidents. Although the Supreme Court had declared such strikes to be unconstitutional and illegal, and despite the common tendency for such strikes to be followed by violence, no action was taken by the state to prevent the strike. The government did not attempt to stop the initial outbreak of violence across the state. False stories were also printed by local newspapers which claimed that Muslim people had kidnapped and raped Hindu women.
Attackers arrived in Muslim communities across the region in trucks, wearing saffron robes and khaki shorts, bearing a variety of weapons. In many cases, attackers damaged or burned Muslim-owned or occupied buildings while leaving adjacent Hindu buildings untouched. Although many calls to the police were made from victims, they were told by the police that "we have no orders to save you. In Baroda the administration imposed a curfew in seven areas of the city.
Antani , then the deputy superintendent of police, deployed the Rapid Action Force to sensitive areas in Godhra. A shoot-to-kill order was issued. Members of the opposition made accusations that the government had failed to protect Muslim people in the worst rioting in India in more than 10 years. Organizations such as Human Rights Watch criticised the Indian government and the Gujarat state administration for failure to address the resulting humanitarian condition of victims who fled their homes for relief camps during the violence, the "overwhelming majority of them Muslim.
In the Naroda Patiya mass grave of ninety-six bodies, forty-six were women. Rioters also flooded homes and electrocuted entire families inside. According to Kalpana Kannabiran the rapes were part of a well-organized, deliberate and pre-planned strategy, and which facts place the violence into the categories of political pogrom and genocide. Children were also killed in front of their parents. Barring a few, in most instances of sexual violence, the women victims were stripped and paraded naked, then gang-raped, and thereafter quartered and burnt beyond recognition.
The leaders of the mobs even raped young girls, some as young as 11 years old. Even a day-old infant, or a fetus in the womb of its mother, was not spared. After the massacre Gulbarg remained in flames for a week.
The community head reported that the police responded quickly, but were ineffectual as there were so few of them present to help during the attack.
The colony was later visited by Modi on 6 March, who promised the residents that they would be taken care of. In Himatnagar , a man was reportedly found dead with both his eyes gouged out. Of the Hindus that had been killed, thirteen had died as a result of police action and several others had died while attacking Muslim owned properties.
Despite the relatively few attacks by Muslim mobs on Hindu neighbourhoods, twenty-four Muslims were reported to have died in police shootings. This coverage played a central role in the politics of the situation. Media coverage was generally critical of the Hindu right; however, the BJP portrayed the coverage as an assault on the honor of Gujaratis and turned the hostility into an emotive part of their electoral campaign.
Hindutva supporters and police officers attacked almost a dozen journalists. On a return trip from having interviewed Modi when their car was surrounded by a crowd, one of the crowd claimed that they would be killed should they be a member of a minority community. The Editors Guild of India, in its report on media ethics and coverage on the incidents stated that the news coverage was exemplary, with only a few minor lapses.
The local newspapers Sandesh and Gujarat Samachar , however, were heavily criticised. The newspaper also used a quote from a VHP leader as a headline, "Avenge with blood. The paper carried reports to highlight communal harmony. Gujarat Today was given praise for showing restraint and for the balanced reportage of the violence.
The Editors Guild rejected the charge that graphic news coverage aggravated the situation, saying that the coverage exposed the "horrors" of the riots as well as the "supine if not complicit" attitude of the state, helping to propel remedial action. These allegations center around several ideas. First, the state did little to quell the violence, with attacks continuing well through the Spring. Further, some attackers used voter lists and other documents obtainable only with government assistance in order to target Muslim communities and households.
One minister who spoke with Rediff. The deputy superintendent of police stated that the Rapid Action Force had been deployed to sensitive areas in Godhra. Gordhan Zadafia , the Minister of State for Home, stated that he believed there would be no retaliation from the Hindu community.
At one Muslim locality, of the twenty-nine deaths, sixteen were caused by police firing into the locality. Hibbard, the violence had been planned far in advance, and that similar to other instances of communal violence the Bajrang Dal , the VHP and the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh RSS all took part in the attacks.
At this meeting, officials were instructed not to obstruct the Hindu rage following the incident. He said "Hindus are frustrated over the role of Muslims in the on-going violence in Indian-administered Kashmir and other parts of India. Local judges were also biased. The Supreme Court also lambasted the Gujarat government as "modern day Neros" who looked elsewhere when innocent women and children were burning and then interfered with prosecution.
Raghavan was appointed to chair the Team. Other than Raghavan, half of the six members of the team were recruited from the Gujarat police, and the Gujarat High Court was still responsible for appointing judicial officers. The SIT made efforts to appoint independent prosecutors but some of them resigned due to their inability to function. No efforts were made to protect the witnesses and Raghavan himself was said to be an "absentee investigator," who spent only a few days every month in Gujarat, with the investigations being conducted by the remainder of the team.
Thirty-one of the Muslim convictions were for the massacre of Hindus in Godhra. The Indian Supreme Court , acting on a petition by social activist Teesta Setalvad , ordered a retrial outside Gujarat in which nine accused were found guilty in The team successfully located and exhumed the remains of victims. The court also set aside the acquittal of the remaining seven accused in the case, including Gujarat police officers and doctors of a government hospital, who were charged with suppressing and tampering with evidence.
The court passed strictures against the police for failing to protect the people under their escort and failing to identify the attackers they had seen. The court case began in , and over three hundred people including victims, witnesses, doctors, and journalists testified before the court. For the first time, the verdict acknowledged the role of a politician in inciting Hindu mobs. Activists asserted that the verdict would embolden the opponent of Narendra Modi, the then chief minister of Gujarat, in the crucial run-up to state elections later that year, when Modi would be seeking a third term The BJP and he eventually went on to win the elections .
Modi refused to apologise and denied that the government had a role in the riots. Twenty-nine people were acquitted during the verdict. Teesta Setalvad said "For the first time, this judgment actually goes beyond neighborhood perpetrators and goes up to the political conspiracy. The fact that convictions have gone that high means the conspiracy charge has been accepted and the political influencing of the mobs has been accepted by the judge. This is a huge victory for justice. Raghavan has said that false witnesses were tutored to give evidence about imaginary incidents by Setalvad and other NGOs.
NHRC also expressed "widespread lack of faith" in the integrity of the investigation of major incidents of violence. The CCT consisting of eminent high court judges released a detailed three-volume report on the riots. On the statewide riots, the CCT reported that, several days before the Godhra incident, which was the excuse used for the attacks, homes belonging to Hindus in Muslim areas had been marked with pictures of Hindu deities or saffron flags, and that this had been done to prevent any accidental assaults on Hindu homes or businesses.
They also reported that "The complicity of the state government is obvious. And, the support of the central government to the state government in all that it did is also by now a matter of common knowledge. Shah to conduct, what became, a controversial one man inquiry into the Godhra incident , its credibility was questioned and the NHRC and the National Minorities Commission requested that a sitting judge from the supreme court be appointed.
The supreme court overturned the findings by Shah stating, "this judgement is not based on the understanding of any evidence, but on imagination. The commission was caught up in controversy from the beginning. Activists and members of the opposition insisted on a judicial commission to be set up and headed by a sitting judge rather than a retired one from the high court.
The state government refused. Within a few months Nanavati, before hearing any testimony declared there was no evidence of lapses by either the police or government in their handling of the violence. Tehelka also recorded Ranjitsinh Patel where he stated that he and Prabhatsinh Patel had been paid fifty thousand rupees each to amend earlier statements and to identify some Muslims as conspirators.
Kamal Mitra Chenoy concluded that the violence was more akin to ethnic cleansing or a pogrom rather than communal violence. The report said that the violence surpassed other periods of communal violence such as in , , , and not only in the total loss of life, but also in the savagery of the attacks.
Of them, 11, were arrested for criminal behavior 3, Muslim, 7, Hindu and 16, were arrested as a preventive measure 2, Muslim, 13, Hindu.
The CCT tribunal reported that 90 percent of those arrested were almost immediately granted bail, even if they had been arrested on suspicion of murder or arson. There were also media reports that political leaders gave those being released public welcomes. Sreekumar , police officers who followed the rule of law and helped prevent the riots from spreading were punished by the Modi government.
They were subjected to disciplinary proceedings and transfers with some having to leave the state. The Gujarat government denied his allegations, claiming that they were "baseless" and based on malice because Sreekumar had not been promoted. Cancer is an incurable disease. Its only cure is operation. O Hindus, take weapons in your hands and remove this cancer from your roots.
2002 की गुजरात हिंसा
Himatnagar Location of major incidents. Although the Supreme Court had declared such strikes to be unconstitutional and illegal, and despite the common tendency for such strikes to be followed by violence, no action was taken by the state to prevent the strike. The government did not attempt to stop the initial outbreak of violence across the state. False stories were also printed by local newspapers which claimed that Muslim people had kidnapped and raped Hindu women. Attackers arrived in Muslim communities across the region in trucks, wearing saffron robes and khaki shorts, bearing a variety of weapons.
What happened in Godhra, Gujurat?
Appointment[ edit ] On 6 March the Gujarat government set up a commission of inquiry to investigate the incident and submit a report, the chairman and sole member of which was retired Gujarat High Court judge K G Shah. As a result, the government reconstituted the commission into a two-member committee, appointing retired Supreme Court judge G T Nanavati to lead the commission, which thus became known as the "Nanavati-Shah Commission". The CPI M said that the report reinforced communal prejudices. Banerjee, presenting the final report of enquiry on Godhra fire incident to the Chairman of the Railway Board, J. In September , two and half years after the train burning, Yadav appointed former Supreme Court Justice Umesh Chandra Banerjee to investigate the incident. In January Banerjee presented his interim report, which tentatively ascribed the fire as an "accidental fire," after ruling out other theories. He cited a forensic report stating that the injuries on the victims were only compatible with an "internal fire.