Best Bakery Case: Accused Alleges Tutoring Of Witnesses By Teesta Setalvad, Seeks Transfer Of Trial

One of the two accused facing trial in Mumbai in the second part of the Best Bakery case of Gujarat has alleged tutoring of witnesses in the trial and sought transfer of the case to some other Additional Sessions Judge. The plea filed by Harshad Solanki before the Principal Sessions Judge Vrushali Joshi alleges that the existing trial judge had not taken cognisance of his apprehensions that witnesses were being tutored by the Special Public Prosecutor. The application also raises doubt on the role of activist Teesta Setalvad after her arrest by the Gujarat police and says that her role in tutoring of witnesses also needs to be probed. "The controversy in the said matter related to rights of accused for getting a fair treatment when a witness in the previous separated trial makes appearance in witness box. The accused had prayed that such witnesses ought to be examined afresh. It was the prosecution's contention that the earlier deposition (i.e. notes of evidence) has to be continued/carried forward and that the present accused would get a right of cross-examination if the witness is available. When present advocates for the accused/applicant herein filed their Vakalatnama somewhere in February 2022, it has been shockingly found that the Special Public Prosecutor has examined a few witnesses in furtherance of the earlier statement recorded by this Hon'ble Court in the previous trial. Such a hybrid method is completely impermissible in law," the application states. It further alleges tutoring of witnesses by the Special Public Prosecutor by saying, "In an instance in which an eye witness had described an accused but did not identify him due to his non-availability, the question of asking him to identify such accused may probably arise (without going into the merit of any such identification for evidential value) However if the witness had not referred to the accused at all either by name or by description, there is no question of Public Prosecutor asking the witness any further questions about identifying the accused. That would amount to improving the evidence by tutoring the witness." The current application before the Principal Judge claims that an application was filed before the trial after the abovementioned incident, however, it has still been kept pending. That application seeks that the trial may be conducted on a day to day basis; officer of investigation agency be summoned and directed to keep present all witnesses for such day to day trial; and a notice be issued to the Special PP to ensure that the trial progresses without adjournment and that in her absence, the Court would proceed with the matter since the directions of higher courts requires that a witness present in Court deserves to be duly respected and cannot be turned away due to failure of advocates to cooperate with Court. The latest application further alleges in the backdrop of the allegations made by him, the news about arrest of Teesta Setalvad by Gujarat Police is a relevant development for the trial. "It is specifically and categorically submitted that the accused is a victim of a conspiracy hatched by Ms. Teesta Setalvad and her accomplices to implicate innocents in the infamous Best Bakery Case," the application alleges. Solanki has written to the Gujarat Police that the investigation into the acts of Teesta Setalvad should not be restricted to the incident referred by Zakia Ehsan Jafri and the investigation should be "into the entire gamut of cases." Solanki and another accused Mafat Gohil, arrested in 2013, are facing the trial for allegedly being part of a mob that had attacked Best Bakery at Hanuman Tekri, Vadodara, on March 1, 2002, and killed several people. This was two days after the burning of Sabarmati Express in Godhra on February 27 in which 14 karsevaks (Hindu pilgrims) returning from Ayodhya were killed. Setalvad was arrested by the Gujarat police and is being probed for her purported role in allegedly manipulating evidence and tutoring witnesses who testified before an inquiry commission. Earlier Trial On June 27, 2003, a Vadodara court acquitted all 21 accused in a Gujarat riot case after the witnesses turned hostile. Some of the witnesses later told the media that they were under pressure. Taking cognisance of the matter, the National Human Rights Commission filed a petition before the Supreme Court, which in April 2004 ordered retrial in several riot cases, including the Best Bakery case, in Mumbai. The Mumbai sessions court had in the first phase of the trial in the bakery case convicted nine of the 17 people of murder in February 2006. They were sentenced to life imprisonment while eight others were acquitted.

Best Bakery Case: Accused Alleges Tutoring Of Witnesses By Teesta Setalvad, Seeks Transfer Of Trial

Sharmeen Hakim

Tags