Click to play videoAfter 13 years, the TADA court in Mumbai brought the curtains down on the country’s longest criminal trial. But even as the final verdict in the 1993 Mumbai blasts case has been delivered, several big questions still remain unanswered.
On CNN-IBN’s show The Verdict, hosted by Editor-in-Chief Rajdeep Sardesai, Mumbaikars dealt with some very crucial questions: Has justice been done in the 1993 blasts case? Has justice been done for the riot victims? Is actor Sanjay Dutt a victim or a villain?
The panelists comprised of a cross-section of Mumbaikars, including victims of the Mumbai riots and blasts - people whose family members died and people who suffered injuries.
On the panel of experts were former police commissioner of Mumbai M N Singh, social activist Teesta Setalvad, filmmaker Mahesh Bhatt, Defence Counsel in the 1993 blasts case and Sanjay Dutt’s lawyer Satish Maneshinde, NCP leader Jeetandra Avad and Shiv Sena leader Manohar Joshi.
Has justice been provided for the 1993 bomb blast victims?
A total of 123 people were named as accused in the blasts case and 100 of them were convicted. Of the convicts, 47 were charged with - among other things - being party to the conspiracy to carry out the deadly blasts on March 12, 1993 that killed 257 people and injured 713.
When M N Singh was asked if he feels a sense of vindication or that justice has been done only in parts, he said, “My job was to detect, investigate and prosecute those guilty. The result has been astounding. Professionally I feel satisfied.”
But does Satish Maneshinde feel professionally dissatisfied? Was he defending an indefensible case?
“It wasn’t an indefensible case, but the judgment has been harsh. I don’t speak only on behalf of Sanjay Dutt, but also others who have been convicted,” said Maneshinde.
He added that once the judgment is scrutinised by the Supreme Court, some of those convicted would be free.
In a conspiracy case like the blasts case, one tries to involve everyone and make it as high profile as possible. In a case like that innocent by standers may have also got caught. Sixty-year-old Zebunissa Qazi’s case (who had very little to do with the bomb blasts has also been convicted for five years) is a blaring example.
But Singh said, “All that is far from the truth. All these people were involved in the conspiracy from A to Z.”
He added that while some of the key conspirators have not been caught, unless other agencies and neighbouring countries don’t co-operate, not much can be done.
The fact is that the 1993 blasts case was a heinous act and the harshest punishment is required for all of those. But does that mean that activists like Teesta Setalvad are living in a mode of denial?
“There is no doubt about that. But the question is who are the people convicted, how long a trail takes, and why on the other side is there no public trial of the riot cases,” said Setalvad.
She also said that she fails to understand why the trail of underworld don Abu Salem and kingpin in the blasts case should be separate.
One thing that cannot be ignored is that in the course of the investigation, one single judge could not have gone through thousands and thousands of pages involving hundreds of accused, and that there could be no mistrial and no injustice at all.
But Singh refused to believe there has been any mistake in the trail. “It’s precisely for that reason that it has taken 14 long years to complete the trail,” he said.
Does that mean that justice may have been delayed but not denied? Why should we then target the police when they did a good job of prosecuting the people responsible for the blasts?
“You can’t have half victories for cases like these. I would dance on the streets of Mumbai provided you also convict the architects of the riots which lead subsequently to the 1993 blasts,” Mahesh Bhatt said.
“You are only dancing by treating the symptoms. The disease, the core issue is still not addressed. There were about 900 people who died on the streets. Who is going to punish them?” asked Bhatt.
But till the main accused in the case are prosecuted, the 1993 blasts will always remain an unfinished chapter. But what’s worrying is that the man who masterminded the blasts at the behest of the ISI of Pakistan and Dawood Ibrahim and the D-gang's pointsman in the blasts plot, Tiger Memon are still absconding.
Therefore the feeling among the masses is that the government doesn’t want to pursue the big fish because many of these people are linked to top politicians and it will embarrass them once the truth is out.
But Avad disagreed and remarked, “When America has failed to get Bin Laden and Dawood, what are you talking about?”
He clarified that as far as bomb blasts go, there is not a single person involved in the case is linked with the bomb blasts.
Manohar Joshi’s party had said they would bring back Dawood when they came to power. But his party couldn’t achieve that despite being in power for five years.
While Joshi agreed that the main culprits have not been touched, he put the blame on the Central government.
“It is responsibility of the Central government to bring them back,” Joshi said.
But isn’t there a sense of sadness in that case. Zebunissa’s case is the most dramatic case of what could have gone wrong. Was her crime a part of a larger conspiracy?
“I can’t question the judicial verdict. To say that Zebunissa was totally innocent isn’t also correct,” Singh said.
She has not been given a harsh punishment though it may look it is harsh compared to her role. But that’s the minimum that she could have got, Singh said.
Does that mean that one is then jumping the gun?
“We waited till the judgment was out before we said anything. A man has been given a death penalty five times,” Setalvad pointed out.
However Singh said five death penalties were given because he is involved in five different acts of crime.
“Take the case of one of the ladies of the Memon family. Her crime as revealed by the prosecution was that the car in which the arms and ammunition were found was in her name,” Maneshinde said.
Maneshinde also pointed out that firstly in India not many ladies know what their husband is doing. And secondly do we impose a knowledge on that lady because she was the owner of that car?
Singh quickly reacted to Maneshinde’s remark and said, “Mr Maneshinde defended all those crooks. Why is he complaining? He should have got them acquitted.”
“But has M N Singh arrested all the crooks in the country? Has he arrested politicians with political background? Did he arrest police officers involved in crime? Even a police commissioner was indicted in the riots. What did he do?” Maneshinde asked.
Has justice been provided for the 1992-1993 Mumbai riot victims?
Manohar Joshi was the chief minister of Maharashtra in the mid-90s. There was a charge against him that he was the CM who jumped the Srikrishna Report (The Srikrishna Commission - which was instituted to probe the causes of the Mumbai communal riots of December 1992-January 1993 - submitted its report, but it has not been implemented, and the riot victims have largely been denied justice till date) into the Mumbai riots simply because it indicted the Shiv Sena and some of his favoured police officers. He committed a moral and a legal failure.
“Not at all. I personally feel that riots took place all of a sudden,” Joshi said.
Nine hundred people died the riots, which many believe was a backlash of the Babri Masjid demolition. When asked if Joshi isn’t ashamed that he jumped the report of a senior judge, he said he wasn’t.
“You are asking the culprit of the riots to ask why he has not been prosecuted,” Setalvad said.
She added that I wish officers like M N Singh has shown the same zeal in prosecuting the culprits of the riot as they did the blasts case.
“These people went about whipping up sentiments and organising it. A member of his party (Madhukar Sarpotdar) was caught with ammunition in Bandra and you take poor Sanjay Dutt and parade him in front of the camera and say that his act of recklessness, which I condemn, was a foolish act and he has suffered for it for two years. But what’s happening to that man who had arms and nothing has been done,” Bhatt said.
“When he came to power, he made sure that all the cases those were against the Shiv Sainiks were withdrawn,” Bhatt added.
In reaction to that Joshi said, “Those involved in the bomb blasts case are traitors and unfortunately they are being defended by some section of the society. Action has been taken against some of those mentioned in the Srikrishna Report.”
When asked why he didn’t show the same zeal in the riots case as he did in the blasts case, Singh said, “I am not the one who is known for leaving the crooks and the culprits.”
He informed that it wasn’t the police, which dropped the Madhukar Sarpotdar case against him.
When the Congress-NCP government came to power in 1999, they said they would revive the Srikrishna Report and action would be taken against those mentioned in that. What good is the secularism of Avad then?
“I admit that we have not been that successful in implementing all that we have said,” Avad said.
When asked that political parties don’t prosecute riots because riots follow political agenda, and whether Joshi still justifies the role of the Shiv Sena in the 1992-93 Mumbai riots, he denied Shiv Sena’s role.
“Shiv Sena never take anybody to go for violence,” Joshi said.
Singh was asked if he thinks that someone who murders in a riot is a terrorist just as someone who plants a bomb. “Going by the legal definition, he is not a terrorists. But a murderer is a murderer.”
While the blasts were in a sense a Muslim conspiracy, the riots involved people of both the communities. But while the Hindus got away, the Hindus didn’t.
“As long as you have double moral standards and unless you take focused punitive action against people in the police force who unleash violence against the Muslims, you don’t have a moral high ground,” Bhatt pointed out.
But Singh disagreed with Bhatt’s point of view. He felt it was segregating the issue.
For the last time when Joshi was asked if he had any regrets in not pursuing the Srikrishna Report, he said, “Not at all.”
Is Sanjay Dutt a victim or a villain?
Judge Kode was quite categorical when handing out a sentence to Sanjay Dutt. He gave the sentence on grounds that Sanjay Dutt was a grown up man who had committed a criminal violation, was friendly with the underworld, had committed a criminal act and he deserved to be punished. So did Maneshinde think that Judge Code was right in a sense?
According to Maneshinde, when the judgement was being read out on November 20, 2006 and even now, the Judge had said that he had accepted the confession of Sanjay Dutt.
“If he had to accept the confession of Sanjay Dutt then he should have accepted it to the core. One of the judgements that the Judge believed was that Sanjay Dutt acquired the gun, he kept the gun out of fear, he was victimised and his family was terrorised.” Maneshinde asid.
So did the Judge in a way accept that Sanjay Dutt was not a terrorist?
Maneshinde said that in a way the judge did accept that Sanjay Dutt was not a terrorist. As for himself, Maneshinde personally felt that Dutt should not have been given such a harsh punishment, of which he would appeal to the Supreme Court about.
The Mumbai Police were determined from day one to prove that Dutt was a part of the conspiracy. So was Sanjay Dutt foolish and but was he a terrorist?
“If you have a conventional picture of a terrorist in your mind than you can say that he is just a film star and not a terrorist. He being acquitted under the TADA Act of Arms was a wrong acquittal,” Singh said.
However, Singh said that he did agree with the Judge’s way of describing the degree of Dutt’s offence even if he felt that the punishment was harsh for him.
So was the campaign that was put up by the film industry that Sanjay Dutt was a man of good character and he is was sweet and harmless Munnabhai orchestrated?
Bhatt tried to put the point across that Sanjay was a man of good character because he has shared the grief with Sanjay’s family during his time of arrest earlier.
“Judge Kode had delinked him from terrorism and Sanjay’s offence was hailed as an act of recklessness for which he had already been punished. We the film fraternity are on our bended knees and asking for mercy emphasising that he has not committed a crime that is not so grave,” Bhatt said.
And Bhatt also vehemently denied the fact the Sanjay was being known to commit an act of terror.
Did Singh agree with the distinction that Bhatt made- Sanjay Dutt didn’t commit an act of terror but he only made a mistake?
Singh felt that the entire film industry was in a mode of denial. “I think that they are under pressure of denying the fact which has been established and the judicial verdict is out,” he said.
Singh agreed with the Judge when he said that Sanjay Dutt was not part of the conspiracy but the fact that he possessed the weapons and the sources from which he received them clearly established a case under Section 5 of the TADA Act and that also made him a subject of punishment.
Bhatt who was asked to respond to the remark made by Singh said that he had said in print that Sanjay Dutt was paying a price for his recklessness. However, he said that media had become a victim of its own hype and the story was being exaggerated.
Setalvad intervened then and spoke of an observation that she had made. She felt that Sanjay may have acquired the weapon through some insignificant means but it was also the duty of a police of M N Singh’s calibre to verify the facts.
She threw steam in the discussion when she said that the underworld was not just linked to the film industry but to policemen and politicians also.
Was Sanjay Dutt a victim of a political battle that was going on? It has also been known that politicians who didn’t like Sunil Dutt wanted to settle scores with him and they did that through his son.
Avad denied such stories. “The investigation agency probed and were able to bring evidences in front of the court. Sanjay Dutt’s lawyers defended him in the process but ultimately the law took its own course. Now we have to wait and watch what the Supreme Court has to say,” he said.
So did Avad think that politicians had no culpability in riots?
Avad in response said that the discussion demanded to discuss the main issue and he was of the feeling that justice hadn’t been done in the riot cases, which he had also clearly said in the Assembly.
Teesta averting to the present topic of discussion brought forth a question again and that was why was Abu Salem exempted from the sentences?
Singh said, “In my opinion, he should have been tried along with the other people.”
There were some who have been let off scot-free. But there are those who are purely innocent but they were sentenced but why was there no media outcry and why was there so much of hue and cry over Sanjay Dutt’s sentence?
Bhat said, “The discussion is moving away from the core issue and trivialising the issue. Justice has not been done!”
The show moving away from the main topic of discussion- the sentence of Sanjay Dutt also gave a platform for the riot victims to share heir views on blasts and the riots case.
A woman in the audience who had suffered injuries in the blast shared her experience of how she felt after 14 years of the blast.
“I am totally satisfied with sentence that Sanjay Dutt got and am also happy that the Memon brothers got death sentence,” she said.
Bhatt then said that no matter what ideology perpetrated the blast, the fact was that “Mumbai bled “ and everybody was affected in some way or the other.
Kirti Ajmera was a victim of the first blast that took place in the stock market, did he think that justice had been done?
Ajmera said that he didn’t think that justice had been done. “The accused are being much talked about but has anybody even paid attention to the victims,” he said.
However, Ajmera questioned Avad on his comments on no politicians being involved in the blasts to which Avad still denied any political link.
Ajmera had also been running from pillar to post for compensation but he had been unsuccessful.
Another blast victim, Imran also questioned Avad saying even though he had denied a political link then would he also deny the fact that it was government machinery that had brought the RDX to Mumbai?
His questioning led on to a another point and that was Rubina Memon being given death sentence and the custom officers having got only six years jail, so was there a level of distinction while giving sentences? How did Singh as a police officer handle am issue like that? Was the criminal justice system of the country a selective and partisan between Hindus and Muslims?
Singh clarified the view. “There was a sub-inspector who allowed a truck to pass and he has been given a life sentence. There are some who have been given a life sentence and there are many more who have been given exemplary punishment,” said Singh.
So do the victims also deserve justice apart from the accused being given due sentence?
A woman who was a victim said that she was from a well to do family so she was not much in loss. However, there were some families had lost soul breadwinners and the victims needed justice too.
Final results of the question: Has justice been provided for the 1993 bomb blast victims?
Studio audience:
Yes- 40 per cent
No- 60 per cent.
Nationwide poll:
Yes- 45 per cent
No – 55 per cent
Final comments of the panel
Howsoever, you may escape from the crime but the law catches with you? So in this basis would Satish Mameshinde accept the judgement?
Maneshinde said, “I cannot accept the judgement that is why I am definitely going to challenge the judgement in the Supreme Court.”
Would Jeetendra Avad revise the Srikrishna Commission and reinvestigate the riot cases?
Avad said that since he had already raised the issue in the Assembly and he would see to it the riot cases were reinvestigated.
Did M N Singh think the Mumbai police to some level had demonstrated selective justice?
Singh said, “The Mumbai police has not been selective, but they have done a very god job both in investigating and prosecuting the bomb blast accused and also in the riot cases. Investigating a riot case of this magnitude is a very tough call. However, where the investigation of the blast case was concerned, the police was very fair.”
Did Teesta Setalvad think that she would be known as someone who crusaded for justice but only endetry to club both blast case and the riots case?
Setalvad said, “We have to understand the cause and effect. Be it the blast case or the riots case, innocents were victims. The point is those who are perpetrating terror should be prosecuted.”
Did Mahesh Bhatt think that Sanjay Dutt and the film industry were truly repentant?
Bhatt said, “If you accuse the film industry of being on a denial mode then the police is also on a denial mode.”
(For updates you can share with your friends, follow IBNLive on Facebook, Twitter and Google+)
displayed with permission. Use of the CNN name and/or logo on or as part of CNN-IBN does not derogate from the intellectual property rights of Cable News Network in respect of them.