The Godhra train burning case is the only one that has been deemed fit by the Gujarat government for invoking provisions of Prevention of Terrorist Act (POTA). Even the alleged Jaish-e-Mohammad terrorist, Samirkhan Sarfaraz Khan Pathan, who was arrested on September 30, 2002, for allegedly arriving in the city with the ‘‘mission’’ of eliminating Chief Minister Narendra Modi and other leaders, wasn’t booked under POTA. Pathan was later ‘‘killed’’ in an encounter on October 22, 2002, at about 1.30 am when he allegedly attempted to flee from police custody by snatching a policeman’s weapon. The three alleged agents of Pakistani ISI apprehended from the districts of Rajkot, Bhavnagar and Jamnagar in the past four months have also not been booked under POTA though police claim defence-related documents of highly-sensitive nature have been recovered from their possession. The state government had first invoked the draconian anti-terrorist law on March 2, 2002, against 64 persons accused in the Godhra train carnage. However, the government claims it was then withdrawn as the required formalities had not been completed. Eleven months after it was withdrawn, on February 19, state police submitted an application in the Godhra trial court stating that the 123 persons accused of burning 59 people alive at Godhra railway station had been booked under Section 3(10) of POTA. According to the application, the decision had been taken following fresh revelations made by an accused — Zabir Behra — with regard to involvement of Maulana Hassan Umarji, a cleric from the town who allegedly hatched the conspiracy and formed groups to execute it. ‘‘It is on the basis of this confession that we found it fit to invoke provisions of POTA,’’ says MoS for Home Amit Shah. Additional Director General of Police (CID, Crime and Railways) A.K. Bhargav defends the investigating agency’s decision and says: ‘‘With new facts turning up in the investigations, all the ingredients required for applying provisions of POTA have been found.’’ The Special Investigating Team headed by Bhargav’s deputy, Deputy Inspector General of Police Rakesh Asthana, also ‘‘found’’ a havala angle to the alleged conspiracy. Bhargav admitted that POTA had also been invoked to forestall the possibility of more of the accused obtaining bail and said: ‘‘Yes, that was always at the back of our mind.’’ He then hastened to add that that wasn’t the main reason. So far, investigations have been of little help to him. It has changed track many times. If Haji Bilal was first named as the mastermind, then it was Razak Kurkur and now it is Maulana Hassan Umarji. First there was a conspiracy linked to the ISI, then one linked to the underworld and to the drug-smugglers and then the one linked to the Maulana who allegedly received funds from some Arab countries and brought together Bilal and Kurkur. In between, there was a SIMI angle also added to the conspiracy theory. Legal experts feel the government’s decision to try the Godhra accused under POTA seems to be a sign of desperation with investigation taking twists. ‘‘Statements of most of the accused have been recorded. What about their right of their lawyer’s presence at the time of recording of statement?’’ asks advocate Hashim Qureshi. ‘‘All confessions made by the accused can be used as evidence and submitted in the court. This is more of a political than legal decision,’’ observes B.J. Divan, retired Chief Justice of Gujarat High Court. ‘‘If the accused had disclosed a conspiracy, police should have invoked POTA then. Now it seems it is being done only to book persons against whom there is little evidence. And the accused booked under this Act cannot be granted bail unless the court records a finding that there is no prima facie case against them,’’ says A.D. Shah, a senior criminal lawyer of Gujarat High Court. ‘‘It seems it has been invoked to cover the weakness of the prosecution,’’ says human rights lawyer Dr Mukul Sinha. However, the state government maintains the decision is fair. Minister Amit Shah tactfully says: ‘‘As the investigation progresses you will understand why POTA was needed in this case.’’ ‘‘The intention is not greater punishment. It is just to provide more powers to the investigators,’’ said Home Secretary K. Nityanandam. PART V: In UP, you need to be a Kashmiri to knowPART IV: Fear meant Naxals first, terror Act laterPART III: A handy weapon to settle political scores in Jaya’s statePART II: A 14-yr-old tells you what POTA means to the poorPART I: POTA fact: Jharkhand has a lot more terror than J-K
