If the Godhra case is fit for prosecution under the anti-terrorist law, so are many of the post-Godhra riot cases, especially the massacres at Naroda Patiya and Gulbarg Society. The reason for not doing so, the police say, is that there is no evidence of conspiracy. ‘‘But who is going to bring such evidence on record in riot cases and frame their own men?’’ says former chief justice of Gujarat High Court B.J. Diwan. ‘‘It does not mean there is no evidence. But unless evidence is brought on record it has little value.’’ Some senior police officers agree that the basis on which the Godhra case is being prosecuted under Prevention of Terrorist Activities Act (POTA) could well be applied to post-Godhra riot cases. The intention to kill and spread terror on a large scale, the use of inflammable material and dangerous weapons, the provocation of mobs, the disruption of public life — all that could well apply to most of the 4,200-odd post-Godhra riot cases. Senior police officers and legal experts say even the meeting of a few people minutes before inciting mob violence can be seen as conspiracy — which investigators say has been established in the Godhra case and not in the others. But investigators do not seem to have the willingness to probe that angle. They explain away the post-Godhra violence as spontaneous reaction, a phrase made famous by Chief Minister Narendra Modi. In the worst cases, investigators are even suggesting that the victims brought it upon themselves through grave provocation. Naroda Patiya happened, the Crime Branch concludes in its chargesheet, because a Hindu auto-rickshaw driver was killed in the area. Gulbarg happened, it is suggested in the chargesheet, because the late Ehsan Jafri, a former Congress MP who was one of the victims, opened fire on the crowds gathered around his colony. Even in the selective targeting of Muslim homes and businesses across the state, police don’t see conspiracy. More than 1,700 shops and businesses, including 692 hotels and restaurants, were set afire or looted. In most instances, locals say mobs of outsiders — who obviously needed to be directed to the targets — carried out the attacks, but the state police chief does not think so. Director-General of Police K. Chakravarti told The Indian Express, ‘‘Those accused in the cases are locals, who knew which shop belonged to whom. Only a stranger would need records to check.’’ But who has named the accused in the first place? In most cases the police themselves are complainants, naming accused on basis of investigations that indicate either laziness or unwillingness to explore the conspiracy angle. Asked what made Godhra — and not other rioting cases— so suitable for attracting POTA, Chakravarti said: ‘‘Investigations conducted in the Godhra incident have revealed a particular type of evidence which in turn allows the invoking of POTA. In the riot cases, no such evidence has come on record.’’
