The Gujarat High Court has ordered the Mehsana police to investigate further a 2002 riot case, following a petition filed by victims alleging that the investigation was carried out in a mala fide manner so as to favour the accused.The petitioners belong to Umta village in Visnagar taluka where on February 28, 2002, two persons belonging to the minority community were killed while 100 houses were looted and set afire by a mob. The bodies of Shaikh Mahmadbhai Adbulbhai and Mansuri Abdul Ibrahimbhai, who were killed, are yet to be traced. The petitioners contended that the complaint was not registered properly. They stated that on March 1, 2002, the Visnagar police had registered a complaint under Sections 436, 429, 147, 148, 149 and 143 of the IPC.Serious sections like 302, 201, 295 and 120-B were not applied initially. However, later on, the complaint was amended and these sections were added. Mustakali Mahmad Shaikh, son of the deceased Mahmadbhai, and four others had approached the fast track court in Mehsana pleading further investigation in the case. They alleged that the investigation had not been conducted in a proper manner. However, the fast track court, having heard the case, rejected the plea of the petitioners for further investigation in the case on February 15, 2003. Against the fast track court order, a criminal revision application (CRA) was preferred in the High Court by Mustakali Mahmad Shaikh and four others.Apart from the state of Gujarat, 114 persons of the village and who were accused in the case, were made respondent in the petition filed in the High Court in 2005.Pointing out glaring discrepancies in the investigation, the petitioners have alleged that the police recorded statement on April 4, 2002 of various persons namely Motekhan Misrikhan Siphai and Babalkhan Dosabhai Siphai. Four of the five petitioners are eye-witnesses in the incident. The police report shows them having their houses numbered 107 and 147 as destroyed and a loss of property of Rs 1,500 and Rs 11,500 respectively. Challenging the police version, the petitioners pointed out that both had expired on on January 18, 1989 and November 23, 1993 respectively. The petitioners also produced their death certificates and contended that the police had drawn a false panchnama. It has also been contended that the persons who have been shown as witnesses in the panchnama —namely Sipahi Adalkhan Bastikhan, Shaikh Valimohmad Sultanbhai and Ismailbhai Kasambhai—were also not alive at the time the police had recorded statements as shown in the panchnama. The petitioners also produced the death certificates. of these ‘witnesses’. In view of the fake panchnama and the statements of the witnesses, the petitioners demanded further investigation on the following grounds:• The police have not investigated or tried to recover the remains of the dead persons.• The investigation agency has also failed to recover any of the material looted by the mob.
