All three witnesses examined by the prosecution on Thursday in the Sohrabuddin Shaikh encounter case were declared hostile after they denied being taken to Arham farmhouse in Gujarat where Sohrabuddin and wife Kausarbi were allegedly confined before they were killed in November 2005. So far, the prosecution has examined 49 witnesses and 33 of them have turned hostile, including eyewitnesses, policemen and panch witnesses. The witnesses had signed on a panchnama — a document by investigating officials at the time of the probe to record the substantiate evidence — which described the farmhouse but they said before the court that they were never taken to the farmhouse. The first witness said that in 2007, when he worked as a helper in a petrol pump, two policemen in civilian clothes approached him and asked him to help them. They took him and his co-worker in a jeep to Koba Circle, where they were introduced to a “bade sahab”, who told them they would have to sign on a panchnama. “I do not remember what the panchnama was about. The contents were not read out to me,” the witness said. In his statement before the CID in 2010, the witness had said that a policeman had taken them to Arham farmhouse on April 24, 2007. He had further said that the policeman had informed them that the house was used to confine Sohrabuddin and Kausarbi. But on Thursday the witness told the special CBI court: “Aisa kuch nahi huwa (nothing of this sort happened).” After declaring him hostile while cross-examining him, special public prosecutor B P Raju suggested to the witness that he was making a false deposition before the court to help the police. “Nahin sahab, police ko kyun madat karenge (No sir, why will we help the police)?” the witness said. The second witness, a 52-year-old working in the agriculture sector, said he and his friend were on their way to Adalaj from Koba Circle when they were stopped by policemen. The two had also in their earlier statements said they were shown the farmhouse and that it was photographed in their presence. On Thursday, they said they were made to sign a panchnama near a highway. When asked by the prosecutor if they had read the panchnama before signing, the witness told the court, “Nahin, hum police ko dekh ke ghabra gaye the (no, we got nervous on seeing the police).” The third witness, the previous witness’s friend, also said that the policemen had not shown them any house but had taken their signatures on two panchnamas. On being asked by the prosecutor about the statement he gave in 2010 to the CBI stating otherwise, the witness said it was then that he was told that it was related to the Sohrabuddin case. “Uss din maloom pada toh dhakka laga (I was shocked that day when I got to know),” the witness said. After his deposition, the witness requested Special Judge S J Sharma that he wanted to say something. “Kabhi kisiki madat nahi karni chahiye (One should never help anybody),” he said before leaving the witness box. The court is likely to examine two witnesses on Friday. After the court’s order earlier this week, most of the 22 accused were present in the court on Thursday. At the request of the defence advocates regarding the difficulty in travelling for all the accused from Rajasthan, Andhra Pradesh and Gujarat, the court directed the lawyers to ensure that their clients remain present on relevant days when witnesses pertaining to their role are deposing.
