The Hindu : Monitoring investigation in Gujarat

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Wednesday, Aug 07, 2002

Opinion

Opinion - News Analysis

Monitoring investigation in Gujarat

By C.V. Narasimhan

The Godhra arson and the ghastly wholesale killings of February 2002, meticulously planned and ruthlessly executed by militant communalists in Gujarat, are still under investigation by the police. The Statewide communal flare-up that persisted for over two months seriously undermined public confidence in the administration, especially in the police whose performance was perceivably partisan. Every disturbance to public order was looked at with communally tinted glasses. An objective and fair assessment of events and a realistic appraisal of possible repercussions became casualties. Somehow the situation improved subsequently owing to the innate good sense of the people, and the administration seems to have resumed its responsibilities as a secular Government. However, the recent dissolution of the Assembly and the Chief Minister's call for elections have queered the pitch and the air is filled again with communally distinguishable odours.

In this highly-charged and polarised atmosphere, it is necessary to ensure that the due processes of law are sanitised and kept out of reach of the communal infection. In particular, the investigation of the Godhra incidents should be pursued thoroughly and truthfully to identify the real accused and bring them to justice in court on unimpeachable evidence. This calls for effective supervision of the investigation. It is not enough to say that ultimately the court will dispose of the case on the merits of the evidence only and there is no chance at all for a mala fide investigation to survive in court. We should ensure that mala fide motivations do not in any way influence the course of investigation at any stage.

In recent years, the Supreme Court and some High Courts have had to intervene in some sensational cases even during the investigation stage and issue corrective directions to put them on the proper track. But such interventions have been limited to scrutiny of reports and affidavits placed before the court. It is not in the nature of the court's work to check and cross-check details of evidence unearthed by investigation and ensure that all leads are followed up. This is the job of the established hierarchy in the police system. But this is where the credibility factor comes up.

In the present set-up, the State police cannot possibly command this credibility unless its leadership is protected from extraneous interference by the political executive. Entrusting the case to the CBI will not help since the investigation will require access to hard intelligence relating to lumpen elements at the ground level. This intelligence will be available in much greater measure to the local police than to the CBI. It is, therefore, best that the case is handled by the State police, but with due safeguards.

In the present situation, any investigation by the local police will be perceived by the public to be under political pressure and may, therefore, proceed towards prosecution based on incomplete and coloured evidence, which may ultimately get thrown out in court. This will not at all be in public interest and will seriously prejudice the maintenance of public order. It will, therefore, be most advisable now to constitute a small committee, headed by a retired High Court judge, with a retired Director-General of Police and a former Advocate-General or Public Prosecutor as members, to supervise and monitor the progress of investigation of the Godhra case.

The chairman and members of this committee may be appointed by the State Governor, in consultation with the Chief Justice of the High Court, from a panel of names jointly prepared by the Chief Minister and the Leader of the Opposition.

The Monitoring Committee will have powers to look into the entire record of investigation at every stage, obtain clarifications about the leads followed up, assess the value of evidence unearthed and give appropriate directions to keep the investigation on the right course, bound by truth and law.

The chairman and members should be persons familiar with the local language to facilitate direct appraisal of documentary evidence. The judge-chairman will ensure judicial fairness and objectivity, the police-member will ensure professional thoroughness of investigation and the lawyer-member will ensure a correct appraisal of the nature and adequacy of evidence in the case.

On the experience gained in the working of this committee, its jurisdiction may be widened in due course to cover other sensitive cases as and when they come up. It can then function as a standing committee for this special purpose as an integral part of the criminal justice system.

It will be relevant to recall in this context the famous Baroda dynamite case of the Emergency days in which some leading politicians were arraigned as accused. Before the trial concluded, there was a change of government at the Centre in the general elections of 1977, and the new government promptly withdrew the case and even inducted one of the accused as a Minister! We should not allow such twists and turns in politics to affect the course of law and justice, which are fundamental to democracy.

A monitoring committee as suggested would provide the much-needed protective shield for police investigations of sensitive cases. The immediate constitution of such a committee is a must, if the criminal justice system in Gujarat is to regain public respect and support. Will the political leadership at Delhi take the initiative and advise Gujarat accordingly?

(The writer is a former Director of the Central Bureau of Investigation.)

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Opinion

Stories in this Section

Petrol and patronage

Overhauling the cereal economy

India and oil exploration

The death of innocence

India and the next Gulf war

The mother of all scams

Monitoring investigation in Gujarat

Give us sworn affidavit