New Delhi: On Wednesday, as Rajasthan High Court acquitted four men who had previously been awarded death penalty by a trial court in the 2008 Jaipur blasts case, their families — scattered across villages in Uttar Pradesh’s Azamgarh — wept tears of joy. The four men, at most aged in their twenties when arrested, have spent the past 15 years in prison. They were awarded death penalty in 2019.
While acquitting the four, the Rajasthan high court noted that the probe in the case had been “flawed, shoddy and there were lapses on the part of the investigation team”.
A question mark still hangs, however, on whether the four — Mohammed Saif, Saifurrehman Ansari, Mohammed Salman and Sarvar Azami — will walk out of prison anytime soon, primarily owing to other cases registered against them.
Still, for the families of the four, Wednesday’s high court judgment has come as a ‘ray of hope’.
“After so many years, finally there is a ray of hope. He was arrested in the Batla House encounter case [also of 2008] and then they pinned everything else on him. These 15 years have been like a living punishment for us. Every Ramzan, every Eid, there has only been gloom in our house. We expected even the trial court to understand how everything was pinned on them but that didn’t happen,” Shadab Ahmed (popularly known as Mister), Saif’s father told ThePrint, over phone from his hometown in Azamgarh.
On 13 May, 2008, a series of blasts rocked Jaipur, killing 71 people and injuring another 185. In successive blasts, the bombs exploded at Manak Chowk Khanda, Chandpole Gate, Badi Chaupad, Chhoti Chaupad, Tripolia Gate, Johri Bazar and Sanganeri Gate. According to media reports of the time and the HC judgment, the bombs had been planted on bicycles, placed at crowded marketplaces near temples and police stations.
On 14 May 2008, a day after the blasts, Indian Mujahideen had claimed responsibility for the blasts, through emails sent to TV channels, India TV and Aaj Tak, it was reported.
A total of nine FIRs were registered in the case, and the four have been acquitted in eight of them.
A fifth accused, Shahbaz Hussain, was earlier acquitted by the trial court ‘due to lack of evidence’ and is now said to be living in Lucknow. His acquittal was upheld by the Rajasthan high court.
The court also directed the director general of Rajasthan Police to initiate appropriate enquiry or disciplinary proceedings against the erring officers of the investigating team for “flaws” in the probe.
ThePrint reached Rajasthan director general of police Umesh Mishra on calls and text messages, but received no response till the time of publication of this report. The copy will be updated when a response is received.
Also read: NIA raids 40 locations in Coimbatore & Mangaluru blast probes, seizes digital devices
‘Ray of hope’
In February 2019, Saif was among those awarded death penalty in the 2008 Ahmedabad blasts case, which had left 56 people dead. He is also accused in Delhi’s Batla House encounter case, dating back to the same year.
According to his family, Saif, a postgraduate in ancient history, had moved to Delhi earlier in 2008 to attend English speaking and computer classes.
According to media reports, investigating agencies believe his eldest brother, Shahnawaz Alam, an Unani doctor, to have been killed in Syria, since his whereabouts have been unknown following Saif’s arrest.
Saif is the fourth-born among 13 siblings. One of his co-convicts in the Ahmedabad case is Saifurrehman, who is also from Azamgarh.
The third accused in the Jaipur case to be acquitted Wednesday is Azami, a graduate in electrical and electronics engineering according to his family, who was arrested in 2009 from Ujjain, four days after he joined an IT company there.
“They [the police] showed [on paper] that he was arrested from Lucknow four days later [than his actual arrest],” alleged Azami’s uncle, Mohammed Azim
He added: “They have destroyed 15 years of his and our lives. What is the point of education if ultimately it had to be wasted behind bars like this. We are happy that justice has been served, but [it has come] after so much delay,”
Azim further said, “His father, a lecturer of Mathematics, has been in depression ever since. People from all communities respected him and the police and state put such a big blot on that reputation. But with the high court’s verdict, our bad times seem to be over. This Ramzan [the ongoing Islamic holy month] has brought light to our lives.”
The fourth man to be acquitted Wednesday, Mohammed Salman, was arrested in November 2008 in the Jaipur blasts case. The eldest among five siblings, he was arrested soon after he passed his class 12 boards, recalled his family.
Talking to ThePrint after his acquittal, his brother Mohammed Azizur Rahman said, “How do we express what we are feeling? How do we say our parents are feeling? Imagine losing your son for 15 years in a fake case. We just want him to finally walk out under the clear skies. This is a silver lining.”
In another order passed by the same bench, the court also ruled that Salman was a juvenile at the time of the Jaipur blasts.
All four are also accused in a Jaipur Central Jail assault case. According to Saifurrehman’s lawyer, Minhaz ul Haq, a cross FIR was also lodged against the jail officials. The matter has been stayed in a lower court.
‘Shoddy probe, glaring lapses’
In a 130-page judgment uploaded on the HC website, Rajasthan high court said that the Jaipur blasts case was a “classic example of institutional failure resulting in botched/flawed/shoddy investigation”.
It added: “We fear this isn’t the first case to suffer due to failure of investigation agencies and if things are allowed to continue the way they are, this certainly won’t be the last case in which administration of justice is affected due to shoddy investigation.”
Pointing out the “glaring lapses” in the investigation, the court further observed, “the Investigation Agency has miserably failed in the discharge of their duties; they have performed poorly, the investigation was not only flawed but was also shoddy and the provisions of law as well as their own rules were overlooked… They have approached this case in a callous manner i.e. unbecoming of the members of uniformed posts.”
The court, therefore, held that the investigation agency in this case “should be made responsible/accountable for their negligent, cursory and inefficient actions”.
‘Planted witness’
According to the judgment, Saif was arrested four months after the Jaipur blasts, during the Batla House encounter in Delhi in September 2008.
It added that during invetigations by Delhi police, Saif allegedly disclosed his involvement in the Jaipur blasts, along with the involvement of nine other accused in the blasts. They were then tried for the Jaipur cases (nine cases were registered) in Rajasthan.
Alleging that the Jaipur blasts accused knew each other and had visited Jaipur on 11 May in groups to do a reconnaissance of the places where they intended to plant the bombs, the prosecution claimed that they then made bombs at Batla House in Delhi on 12 May, went to Jaipur on 13 May and returned the same day by the Ajmer Shatabdi Express under “fake Hindu names”. The prosecution’s comments are included in the judgment.
The high court noted, however, that the investigating agencies had relied heavily on the disclosure statements allegedly made by Saif while in custody of Delhi police. However, it noted that such “confession” made to a police officer is not admissible as evidence under the Evidence Act of 1872.
In any case, the court opined that “generic Muslim names were used” in his disclosure statement, and that it does not disclose the identity of the co-conspirators.
Similarly, police confessions by the other three accused were also rejected by the court.
The prosecution had claimed that Saif was recognised by an employee of a cycle company in a test identification parade as the man who had allegedly purchased one of the bicycles that were used in the blasts. However, the identification parade was conducted after over seven months after the blast, the court noted.
According to the prosecution, the employee had claimed he remembered every person who had bought cycles from him in the past 10 years. However, the court opined that “his claim and testimony seems…over-reaching”, and that he seems to be a “planted witness”.
While the prosecution had submitted that the employee had claimed that he had recognised Saif based on a mark on his face, the court noted that the test identification parade report made by the magistrate did not mention any such distinct mark on Saif’s face.
Fabrications and manipulations
The prosecution had also claimed that the other accused were also identified by people who sold them bicycles that were used in the blasts.
However, the court noted that this evidence “needs to be discarded as sale of cycle has not been established, test identification parade was conducted after inordinate delay, the same was conducted in the presence of Police Official, the possibility that accused was shown to the witness cannot be ruled out”.
“The witnesses had cloudy memory as they deposed before the Court that they cannot identify purchasers, who had purchased cycles few days back, in those circumstances, seeing a purchaser for few minutes and then identifying him after many months was humanly impossible and thus, their evidence is disbelieved by the Court,” the court observed.
In order to establish the sale and use of bicycles for planting bombs, the prosecution had produced bill books of cycle shops, from which the cycles were allegedly bought. However, examining the bills before it, the court found that they “suffer from many infirmities such as mismatch of frame numbers, date of sale and seeming fabrications and manipulations”.
The high court noted that till Saif’s arrest, the prosecution had no link or clue with regard to the Jaipur bomb blasts. It further pointed out that the prosecution had not produced any evidence to establish that there was any agreement between the accused or any prior “meeting of mind” between them. It, therefore, asserted that the prosecution had failed to prove a criminal conspiracy between the accused.
In a separate concurring opinion, Justice Bhandari pointed out that the alleged travel made by the accused between Delhi and Jaipur had also not been “conclusively proved”, and no CCTV footage or call details had been produced to prove the travel.
The court also acknowledged the “degree of agony and frustration that may be caused to the society in general and the families of the victims in particular by the fact that a heinous crime like this goes unpunished”. However, it observed that the “law does not permit the Courts to punish the accused on the basis of moral conviction or on suspicion alone”.
The court, therefore, asserted that the “investigation was not fair and it appears that nefarious means were employed by the Investigating Agencies, material witnesses required to unfold the events were withheld and apparent manipulations and fabrications have been done during the investigation.”
(Edited by Poulomi Banerjee)
Also read: Armed men enter Lucknow court complex and hurl crude bombs, 3 lawyers injured